Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-09-14

of non-interyention by US in foreign wars; talk
about the invasion Of us by foreign nations as
much as you please, as pretext for assuming
powers not granted by the Constitution but
the strongest security we have on these points
is physical law
i shall not 60 into that question now but
undertake to say that in the face of our navy,
or even without navy, the shipping of Eu.
rope cannot bring, with their munitions, for
midable force against US. With all the re-
sources of your naval and maritime marine you
could not transport tomorrow to Hungary,
Turkey, or Russia an army, with its munitions
and supplies, that would be drop in the
bucket in European war, or sufficient to
form hardly division in the field.
The idea, then, that these roads in the inte-
rior are made for military purposes, to enable
the rapid concentration of troops in time of
war, is as perfect subterfuge as any to which
intelligent men can resort 1t is a perversion
of the Constitution; it is in defraud of it to
claim the power to make these roads under the
war power. To illustrate my view, take a case
which is familiar to the Democracy of this
country. Does anybody doubt the exclusive
right of Congress to legislate for the District
Of Columbia? But could you, under the guise
of legislating for this District, and in pursu,
trict purposes, charter bank of the United
States? Could you defraud the Constitution
by subterfuge of that sort? You can do it
ust as much as you can defraud the Constitu-
ton under the power "to dispose of and make
all needful rules and regulations in respect to
the Territory, &C., of the United States" by
disposing of them for other objects than those
defined in the Constitution or, under the war
power, make roads in cases when the defense
of the country is not the direct object.
But the gentleman from Ohio Mr. CAMPBELL
undertook yesterday to arraign some members
here as inimical to the West, and in doing SO
used one of those expressions which are be.
coming idiomatic OF late He said that we
were dumping" into the West.
Mr.. CAMPBELL. said "pitching" into
the West.
Mr.. BAYLY. Well, "pitchingn in. It be-
longs to the same class of expressions as
crushing OUT and all that sort of idiomatic
expressions, as suppose they will be regard
ed, but which are not known, believe, in our
language in the sense in which they are now
used. They are significant, nevertheless. But
when has the South ever shown any disposition
to "pitch" into the West?
Mr.. CAMPBELL. l spoke of Virginia.
You always vote invariably against appropria-
tons for the Improvement of the western rivers
and northern lakes.
Mr.. BAYLY. am glad the gentleman has
relieved me from some of the remarks which
intended to have made. thought his remarks
were meant for the South as whole. But he
confines them now to Virginia. This relieves
me. When has Virginia ever shown any en-
nifty to the West?
Mr.. CAMPBELL. did not say that she
had shown enmity, but that she was opposed to
western interests.
Mr.. BAYLY. Opposed to western interests?
When did she manifest it?
Mr. CAMPBELL. have already told You
that she has voted against every appropriation
for western rivers and northern lakes.
Mr.. BAfLY. Did we not at the same time
vote against similar appropriations to our own
slater Did we then show more opposition,
taking the gentleman's criterion, to western
interest than we did to our own? Did she
manifest 1t when she gave to the Union that
domain which, In proportion to the number of
acres contained in it, is the richest on this
earth? Did she show it, to use another idiom.
when she always stood up" for the free nayi
CATION of the Mississippi, and opposed in every
contingency the abandonment Of it? Did she
show her enmity to the West when, in spite Of
all obstacles and difficulties, her statesmen ac-
CURED and gave Louisiana to the Union. com.
prising whole tier of States, some of which
have already come into the Union, and others
OF which are likely to be brought in shortly I?
Did she show her enmity when her whole dele
CATION voted to bring Missouri, one of the
richest western States, into the Union, without
any restrictions upon her sovereignty? Did
she show IT when she supported-I will not re-
Ter TO the case OF Arkansas, as then we may
have been supposed to have slavery partiality
the admission of Illinois, when it was We
hemently resisted? Did the South, and espe-
cially Virginia, show her enmity 10 the West
upon that occasion2 No, sir; no. The cases
in which the gentleman says we have been un-
| friendly to the West are those in which, if we
have been unfriendly to anybody, it has been
| equally to ourselves.
My friend from Illinois Mr. BIssELLl here
says that we imposed the ordinance Of 1887
upon them. shall not discuss that question
now, for should be properly called TO order il
l should undertake to discuss it but in day
or two hope may have the floor to discuss
1T TO the satisfaction of that gentleman.
i desire to know Of single instance where
the South, or Virginia particularly, has not
shown herself the friend, might almost saw
the foster-mother, Of the West2 / have referred
the gentleman from Ohio to the course of Vir.
ginia in several cases where think the interest
Of the West was concerned. i beg him, in each
Of these instances, TO look and see what was
the course Of those for whom he seems TO feel
more gratitude. Who was it that was for sur
rendering the free navigation Of the Missis-
sippi? that opposed the acquisition Of Loui.
siana9 Who was it that opposed the admis.
sion of Missouri into the Union? Who was II
that opposed the admission Of Illinois event.
They were not southern men. If the gentle.
man from Ohio Mr.. CAMPBELL will take the
pains to recur to the record he will find that
that opposition did not come from the South
But because we are friendly to the West, be
cause we desire to see her prosper. it does moi
follow, therefore, that we are 10 abandon al
our constitutional opinions and thatw are &c
come here and, under the guise Of making
needful rules and regulations in respect to the
Territories, and under the guise OF providing
for the defence Of the country, construct for tho
States from the funds Of the general govern
ment their own local improvements
The gentleman from Ohio Mr.. CAMPBELL
yesterday made another statement in his argu
! ment, which is constantly made here, and {
moro dacantiva ono IA anpaara IN mn =, 20 -,