The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1860-03-07

Being navigable water OF the United States,
of course Congress must give its consent
just as it gave its consent TO the city of Bal
timore to levy tonnage duties on vessels
coming up the river to the city of Baltimore,
being within the jurisdiction of the United
States. / take the last case. The President
cites others. | take the last case of such a
law. Being water within the jurisdiction
of the United States, the State of course
could not close it, because it is a national
highway but with the consent of Congress,
the State could lay taxes or toll and make
improvements so as to facilitate the trans
portation of commerce across it. And, in
relation to the St. Clair flats, | may say
that this question is not to me entirely new
In the failure of appropriations, the merchants
of Detroit at one time, thought it advisable
that they should undertake to improve it
themselves. | cordially c,ncurred in the
view which they took of it at that time, made
an estimate by granting such assistance as it
was possible for the War Department to furn-
ish in the shape OF dredging boats, and other
things they then had on hand, that for $12,-
OO0 they could open the channel so that it
would answer for the years commerce. The
Presidents view, therefore, in relation to the
city or State sustaining the channel ITSELF and
imposing tax on the local commerce which
would maintain the local Improvements, is in
exact accordance with the opinion hold now
and have held ever since examined the ques-
ton. l entirely approve his message in that
particular.
| think, then, if the Senator from Michigan
desires to know how improvements can be
made, may properly answer him, by tolls,
BY taxes, by wharfage duties, by light taxes,
by all of those taxes which the sovereignty
Of State, or joint sovereignties having equal
control ofthe river, by the consent Of Congress,
may impose upon the commerce which passes
OVERT. In practice, see that it has many diff
cuIties but believe it would be better plan
than the one we now have. | think it would
give some continuity and congruity to the con-
duct of works thus undertaken, and render Sc
cure that commerce which is now interrupted
by the failure Of an appropriation one year, the
obtaining of an appropriation another, the
greater portion cf which, is expended in getting
ready the material and machinery, and then
the appropriation fails the boats either rot in
the water or are sunk to preserve them as long
as possible, or are sold, perhaps, because the
Government can make no use of them in
another season. 1t is no argument to me to
to tell me how much ofcommerce goes through
a channel. That has been no argument to me
in relation to the commerce which floats past
the door of my own residence-the greatest
commerce in the United States. | hold, in
one place as we'll as another, at home as well
as in any other portion of the United States,
that this power to tax the whole people Of
the United States to improve the navigation
of one locality is an offence against the Con
stitution, and not to be drawn from any of its
specific grants.
do not suppose that tax upon the cotton
of Missouri, which the Senator says passes
over this channel, would amount to much
The tobacco, perhaps, would give something.
Missouri cotton, l think, would yield very
little. Whatever the tax be, it will be for the
people themselves to decide. They will put
it as low as they can, andthey will administer
the fund as economically as they can. In
stead of bargains, contracts, jobs, waSteful
expenditure, as it is now presented to the
public, we shall have that rigid economy, both
in the sum to be raised and in the expendi-
ture Of the sum when collected, which will
give full return to every one for every cent
which he has taken out of his pocket. 1t
would be a great improvement in the machin-
cry and operation OF the Government.
As to the arraignment Of the President for
his position, will only say that, from the time
of Mr.. Monroe down, it has been the position
of those who constituted the party of which
the President is the head for the time being ;
that he has but announced in this message, in
language specific and applicable to the particu-
lar case, the position which we have held for
so many years and that if these principles
are involved in any debate which renders it
necessary to defend them, | may then, or
others who can better perform it may enter
into the defence of these principles. For the
present it is only needful to show that the
President directs his objections to particular
act, both constitutional and special, and Pounds
them upon basis which deem wholly to
Justify them.
Mr.. HAMLIN Mr. President, | think
understood the Senator from Mississippi to
say, with regard to the imposition of tonnage
duties, that they must be imposed upon vessels
coming from foreign port, ard not on those
coming from one port of the United States to
another.
Mr.. DAVIS. That is rather my impression.
Mn HAMLIN. | so understood the Senator
and concur with him in opinion.
Mr.. DAVIS. The Senator from Maine viii
recollect that we had that discussion lasef'
once before, and my position did na'srcc
great deal of favor. | always thought Una
AAlaasA a-4,;@fons IN the Constltu
ton covering it.
| Mr. HAMLIN l recollect the discussion
and was very glad to learn the Senator's opin
ion to-day, because had been told that, on d
review of the question. he had deemed his
| former opinion erroneous. | am very glad tC
learn that he still maintains his original opinion
on this point, which am inclined to think is
right
Mr. DAVIS The Senator heard Inc say il
the Senate that upon review OF the subject
because of discussion here | fonnd point
taken, | think by Senator from Georgia
that to allow goods from foreign port to pass
| from port of one State to be entered in a
port of another without paying duty, was a
| fair construction of one clause of the COnsti-
tuition which has been quoted on this subject
| did not change my opinion on the other
point.
Mr. HAMLrN. | agree with the Senator in
that
Mr.. CLAY ! only wish to say on this sub
! ject that differ entirely with the two Senators
| who have just expressed their opinions. Ido
| not think the Constitution contemplated there
should be any discrimination whatever be-
tween tonnage from foreign port and from a
domestic port and as | have prepared a bill
with the consent of the Committee on Com
merce, giving the assent of Congress to the
| levying IT tonnage duties by the State oil
Alabama upon the tonnage entering the port
of Mobile, whether it be from any foreign port
or any domestic port, l think proper to say
| that | prepared that bill after due examina-
| ton of the question, and that | am satisfied
whenever the Senate comes to consider it. and
examine the history of the clause of the Con-
stitution as exhibited in the debates of the
Convention, and the subsequent action o.
Congress for period of forty years, they will
see very clearly, as believe, that there is nc
such discrimination. For thirty or forty years
after the Government went into operation
such bills were common and shall be pre-
pared. when the occasion arises, to show that
| many Of them were enacted by the States,
with the consent of Congress, levying duties
on tonnage engaged in the coasting trade just
as upon vessels from foreign powers.
| Mr.. DAVIS. My friend from Alabama no.
tilted me of the introduction of his bill, and
| it was understood between US that we were to
have conversation. If had had the benefit
of that conversation, perhaps should this
morning have announced to the Senator from
Maine change of opinion. Whenever he
can convince me that am wrong, l shall
change my opinion on the question. have not
changed it yet, though am open to conviction,
and must say am ready to be convinced
because see the difficulties of my own post
ion, and see how they may be removed if his
is right.
Mr. CLAY. 1t is due to the Senator and
myself to say, that did not advise the Sena-
tor from Maine that he had changed his opin-
I oI