The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-04-05

YsIssA a. NJ t. wIssn.s A. l.. cHslps, and Dr. ws Iwwls
Receipts Of either viii b. sced.
THE BILLS FOR DEEPENING THE CHANNEL OVER
THE ST. CLAIR FLATS AND OF THE ST. MARY's
RIVER, IN VIE STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND FOR
THE REMOVING INSTRUCTIONS IN THE SAVAN-
NAH RIVER, IN GEORGIA.
The difference In the action of the President these
two bills has been made subject Of good deal OF
nent and criticism in the papers Of the Northwest When
the facts properly understood persuaded it viii
be readily conceded that there exists just ground for
complaint or dissatisfaction however much the improve
ment Of the ST Clair flats and the St. Mary river may be
desired for commercial purposes.
The facts that the billsoue for removing obstruc
tons 10 the Savannah river and the other for improving
the nayg CATION o. the ST. Clair flats and the ST Marys
riverwere presented 10 the President the time
the first approved and that the second
NOT have been seized upon to charge the President with
disposition make concessions to the South, and to with
hold just consideration from the North. The accusation,
upon the Of il is absurd, the condolences and diff
ferences se ed to sustain it are so accidental and unim
pornut that have doubted the propriety Of giving it
even passing notice but lest any should be misled by
reckless msrepresen taiion submit statement Of the
resi- d,herence between the cases and ask for candid
consideration from those whose first wish is to their
accordance with s constitutional powers.
Another suggestion not less unjust and unfounded, is
that the appropriation designed to remove
inland obstruction and improvement the At
lantic coast therefore the President regarded il work
not within the purview of the constitution BY reference
10 the first message OF President Pierce il is
that he repudates the distinction which recognises diff
terence Of constitutional power in regard to appropriations
for improvements the Atlantic coast and the lakes
and western rivers. This distinction again denied
and rejected in bis special message internal improve
by the general government sent to Congress the
3oth Of December 1854 In this message the President
says expressly that no rule admissible which under
takes Discriminate far regards river and harbor
improvements between the Atlantic Pacific and
the great lakes and rivers of the interior regions of North
America
These bills presented the President for his APP
prevail at midnight Of Saturday, the Sd of March, and
within the last hours of the expiring Congress- He had
paired the Capitol facilitate the despatch of the
Of legislative and executive business which al
ways crowded upon the President during the closing
session of Congress 1t requisite for him only
the great multiplicity of bills presented for his
signature but also to consider and prepare the various
nominations for important appointments called for by
of those very bills, and which Of necessity be
submitted the Senate for confirmation before its adjourn
These the circumstances under which these
two bills presented Upon reading the bin for the
removal of Instructions in the Savannah river he saw
upon Of il the evidence that the distractions
placed there during the revolutionary for the
defence and therefore, in his Judgment proper be
moved at the charge of the United States. Having had
OCCASION upon the passage Of the CapeFear bill q: the for
session. examine the constitutional question
he was prepared at 10 approve the Savannahrver
BILL for the that he had approved the Cape
Fear-riyer bill.
An examination OF tho bin for St Clair fats and St
Marys river not only showed that the suggestion
tanned in the Presidents special Of December 80
1884 in regard to passing separate bills for each i'm
proyencn had been dsregarded but that independent Of
this objection the question to the constitntionay Of
the appropriation in the bin presented in manner
that called for investigation of facts and principles
which il impossible make under the circumstances
The st Marys river appropriation not only for
new work, but for for which estimate had been
recommended by the Executive. We have already re
ferred to the pressure Of official business under which all
the time and energies Of the President employed
Thus situated bin is presented involving grave
tutiona question: which il morally and physically inn
possible for the President to examine and decide satsac
torily The democratic convention which nominated him
had declared of its principles that Congress hns
constitutional power to enact general system of internal
Improvements In accepting the nomination, he had
pledged himself TO carry out this principle. The APP
prevail dapproya of the bill necessarily presupposc
such examination necessary determine the true
import Of the pledge given, and to make such decs-
ion upon the constitutional question would accord with
his pledge The President had of the pend
ency before Congress of the bill Its presentation to him
for his approval under the circumstances stated his
FIRST notification of its existence How could he possibly
redeem his pledge TO the democratic party and acqu his
conscence without examination which would enable
Linn either TO approve dsapprove the bill ntelligeny
Ills approval d,sapprova rest upon conscien-
uous tonvicliou merits aeInrrr,s
measure. Besides, in his special message internal
improvements by the general government he had denied
the power Of Congress make appropriations for works
OF improvement under the clause Of the constitution
the regulation Of commerce AT the same time he had
conceded the power 10 improve the navigaby OF river
deepen protect hsrbor when the object Of the
improvement has reference necessary military or naval
purposes but be had said that the rghtuness of an ap
preparation for such object depends upon the military
naval exigency OF the There nothing on the
CAGE OF the bill which showed whether the appropriation
~ r.. 49, "a. :.