The American patriot., 1855-10-13
For the American Patriot.
Review Of a Speech made by Mr.. Haynes
in Review Of q Speech made by Col.
Pond.
Article l-lnternot Improvements.

>A'Sss'e A-AuteTHNt improvements
have read with much pleasure the neat and
able review Of Col. Ponds speech, which review
was delivered in the form Of speech to the Demo.
cratic Central Club in Clinton, and was published
in the Louisiana Democrat, of the 18th ult
The candid, high toned and gentleman1y manner
in which that review is conducted, ccgtairly COM
mends it to the respectful! consid ration of Col
Pond hims.lf ard al 0 co'nmends it to the reya
Of the ling public. That review, as il rarely
the case, comes before US in the character of an
earnest and sincere argument and as such we ir-
tend to reply fairly and respectfully to each Of its
most prominent points. Destitute of the usual
slang employed by political understanding in it.
tone and style above the filthy contag'on of po'it
cal abuse or personal Distraction, the speech of Mr.
Haynes invites a respectful and consider te reply
and in the following pag"s the tier will att mpt
to reveal the histo of tho country on tn shi ct
OF Internal improvements Iwll tart with this
proposition: lst. That from NJ" ] 'ffarson 10 Mr..
Polk. the Democratic Pres'd 'nts have denied the
constitutional power of Congress over the subject
of Internal Improvements, whether neral or
local, national or State. Cd. That they hav un.
form!y urged and recomm nd amendmc nts 10
the constitution to grant to such power to Cor.
gross. Sd. That they have uniformly been the
friends of the system as a question Of expedency
apart from the question Of constitutional powc"
4th. That the Whig party have cortended for the
existence of the right in Congress as an im,l'cd
power, and have never advocated any other { a,
general and national system cf improvements, 5th.
That up to the time Of Mr.. Pok's admins ra i,r
there was no difference Of opinion hctw en t. e
Wing and Democratic party uron the polcv--the
single issue between them was the existence or
non-exstence Of the constitutional power in Con-
gress.
Mr.. Haynes will find upon more thorough and
careful examination, that the po.iton assumed by
Col. Pond upon the origin, history and present
condition of the su!j"ct Of Internal Improvement
are strictly in accordanc" with facts as exhibited
by the public records. When Mr.. Haynes states.
"that there are not a f'w who contend for an I'M.
limited power of Congress over the subject" he
commits an e'ro" quite common with those who
have not examined these subj cts with sufficient
care and candor A very material point in all COR
troversy s to understand the position Of your adj
versary--for without this an argument must be
aimed at random. The oil Wing party as I have
always understood their views, never contented
for any power in Congress over the subject of Ir.
ternal Improvements which could conflict witt.
State jurisdiction or State sovereignty The demo.
cratic party have held that there was a total and
absolute want Of right in Congress to adopt and
execute system of internal Improvement The
records of the country furnish us clear and indu-
btable proof Of these propositions.
Mr.. J ferson speaks upon this subject in his
sixth annual message in this language" When
both Of these branches of revenue shall in this
way be relingnshed there will still, ere long, b.
an accumulation of the moneys in the treasury,
beyond the instalments of the public debt which
We are permitted by contract to pay. The qucs-
tlon, therefore, now comes forward to what other
objects shall these surplus funds be appropriated;
ard the whole surplus of imposts after the entire
discharge of the public debt; and during the in.
tervals, when the purposes of war shall not call
for them? Shall we suppress the imposts and
give that advantage to foreign over domestic man.
ufactures? Their patriotism would certainly pre-.
fer its continuance and application to the grea.
purposes of public education, roads, canals and
such other objects Of public improvement as it
may be thought proper to add to the constitutional
enumeration Of federal powers"
Two things are clear and decided in this lar.
guag"-lst. That Mr.. -fferson was the political
friend of system of internal Improvement en-.
bracing public education, roads and crna!s Cd
That he denied the constitutional right in Congress
to adopt and execute such system whether gene.
raj or local, national or State.
We may remark here that the democratic Pres.
idents have considered the subject of internal in-
provemcnts Of such vital and paramount impor-
tance to the count y that they have permitted thu
exercise of such power by Congress, while at the
same time they uniformly and consistently mair-
tanned the total and absolute want Of constitutional
right. Mr.. Jaff .rson purchased Louisiana, altho
he questioned the constitutional right to do; VT
1t was suhjact of such vast importance that his
constitutional scruples were sil need We see
also that in 1905 the Cumberland road bill was
passed and sanctioned by Mr.. Jefferson. This was
q road reaching from Cumberland, in Maryland, to
Ohio, traversing three States by the consent Of
those States-and constituting the first work of
internal improvement of any magnitude, executed
by authority of the federal government
In January 1907. Mr.. Jefferson, in his special
message, informs Congress that he had appointed
commissioners to lay out the road and in 1909,
having received the consent of the three n,med
States that the road should pass through them, he