The weekly Mississippian. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1859-1864, 1860-03-07
lFrom the Washington Constitution,
DEBATE ON INTERNAL IMPROVE
MENTS.

We publish below the remarks delivered in
Senate last week by Hon. JEFFERSON DAVIS,
| in debate upon President BucHANAN's Message
veto;ne the bill for the improvement OF the
u Clair river navigation. The important
conventional questions involved in the state
mont nv the Executive of the views which
govarn his rejection of the measure, and the
| co,snt manner in which the grounds of his
Conservative policy are indicated by Senators
DAVIS TooMBs. WIGFALL, and CLAY, render
this debate one of the most interesting and
practically instructive Of the session.
REMARKS OF SENATOR DAVIS.
Mr.. DAVIS. should like to know dis
tinctly what is the question before the Senate.
The PREsIDING OFFICER. An order was
made By the Senate to print the Message oil
the President of the United States in relation
tn the St. Clair flats. The Senator from Michi
gan moves to reconsider that order; and that
IS the question now pending before the Senate.
Mr. DAVIS. It'll a pro torma motion, then,
as understand. The Senator from Michigan,
whom did not hear very distinctly in the
beginning of his remarks, l thought, presented
for public judgment the consideration whether
it was himself or the President who was ig-
norant of the subject of which the President
treated. Of course, | do not pretend to de-
eide that question. l hope the Senator did
not, in the course of his argument, intend to
decide it in favor of himself He is willing, l
presume, to leave it to the public to decide the
queStisl o. comparative intelligence. | say,
let the public pass judgment. | have nothing
more to say on that.
The Senator however, assumes that which
the President comedies, and directs his argu-
| ments against the Message of the President
as though he denied it. He assumes that this
work IS necessary for military defence, and
arraigns the President for vetoing a work so
essential to military defence but the Presi
dent says he admits the power Of Congress to
construct works which are necessary for mill
tary defence. Therefore, the position of the
| President is not that he will disapproye an ap-
preparation made to construct work which IS
necessary for military defence, but that he
| vetoes this appropriation because he does not
| consider it necessary for military defence. In
that he but exercises a discretion which the
Constitution confers upon the Executive officer,
and no one can gainsay the exercise of that
right, though some may dispute the premises
on which the action is based.
concur with the President in the view
which he takes on that question. concur
with him in the position that if we should
ever have battle with the only power which
would involve the necessity for using this chan
mel, it will be fought by vessels upon the lakes,
but that the growing power of the United
States will take its position north and west
| of the lakes; and the battles will be fought on
! British, and not on American or doubtful, soil.
In peace, as in war, this is valuable as a COM
1 7 L. L.
the prowess and energy Of the people of the
/ United States, and if it be true that we are
to maintain the same national boundary as
now in time of war, then it must be by rail
roads not exposed to British power rather
than by this channel, which runs along the
| British shore, that we must expect to COM
municate between the army and the depot of
supplies.
The st. Clair flats is subject which has
been before Congress great many years, and
has been discussed both in its hydro-dynamic
and its political aspect. In past time have
taken position entirely adverse to that held
by the Senator from Michigan this morning,
and have no occasion now to review the
position thus taken l do not concur with
him in the proposition, either as political
problem or as problem in civil engineering.
The dredging of that deposit which is thrown
up where the current Of the river meets the
deep water of the lake is one which is not to be
terminated by merely dredging the channel.
1t is to be an eternal work until jetties are con-
structed, projecting far into the deep water of
| the lake. and there receiving the wave of the
lake as the wind drives it from the shore and al
lows it to pass beyond its head. That cannot
be done, according to my recollection o. the es-
/ L., h., ol,,.k AaIc &c
dollars.
Mr. CHANDLER. Will the Senator pardon
Inc for interrupting him
Mr.. DAVIS. Certainly.
Mr.. CHANDLER. / will state that the re-
port of Captain Whipple shows that it does
not fall, 1t has not fallen during the past two
years and, furthermore, that the passage Of
propellers and other vessels over that channel,
although it stirs up the loose deposit. that de-
/ post floats Off and the channel remains intact
In his estimation, and in the estimation of
men well acquainted with those flats and with
that trade, this cut will be sufficient and will
| be permanent.
| Mr.. DAVIS. There is diversity of opin-
ion among civil engineers in relation to this
matter There is a great diversity, too. in re-
lation to a Proposfrion winch tne senate Seemed
to decide as though it was as plain as A, b, c
= the question of a fuctuation, running
through term of years. in the tides of the lake.
| shall not enter into these problems. They
are not necessary to any conclusions which
i wish to draw, and do not choose, on this &C.
casion, and in this place, to discuss a problem
| so entirely outside of our legislative duties.
think the President relies on authority, which
very few will successfully dispute, in relation
| to the increase of water in a term of years.
Captain Whipple, an officer of very high intel
| ligence and very high attainments, who has
| charge of the particular work, anticipates o
! subsistence of that tide to state of things
/ which will require an appropriation in the
manner in which the President presents the
| question in his veto message.
1t has also been argued by some of the best
engineers that the. channel will be worthless
if other work is not done. Others have
argued that by giving it sufficient width il
could not be filled up; and others, again, have
argued that it ought to be narrowed, so as to
maintain a strong current. All these are
Questions, however, which do not enter into
the line of argument which, l think, leads me
10 the only conclusion we have to adopt is
this a work for the United States, or is it not
| concur with the President, that it is not
necessary for military purposes. 1t, therefore
resolves itself into consideration, if it is our
duty to keep open this channel as one of the
channels of commerce That it will contribute
to the military strength of the country in
time Of Wal is unquestionable. So will every
work of internal improvement in the United
States. So will canal around the falls Of
the Ohio. Wherever transportation is re-
quired, providing the means for that trans
portation viii increase the power of the Uni
ted States and enable them better to meet the
contingencies of war It must, however, to
bring it within the power to maintain an army
and provide for the exigencies Of war, be so
directly and palpably essential to the military
uses of the country as to be put outside OF
the general consideration which belongs to
everything that advances the prosperity, and,
consequently, the power of the United States.
/ As aquestion of commerce, l do not think
the Senator's criticism at all fair against the
Presidents objection to deriving from the
power to regulate commerce the power to
Great it. 1t matters not to tell me that SC
many hundreds of tonnage are employed II
there be the power to create a channel over
which vessels shall float, it might with equal
propriety be argued that there was a power
to build the vessels in which the goods were
to be carried. 1t is the creation of commerce
L
whether it be the creation of the vehicles, or
whether the goods themselves are to be fur
nished by the United States and equally sub
ject to the objection which IS made onthe con-
stitutional power, whether it be one or the
other. The power ito regulate commerce, .
| that is to make rules for commerce, as the
President argues, implies nothing for the i'm
proyement of the channels Of commerce /
concur with the arguments which the Presi-
dent presents against this bill, and think it
quite unfair to arraign him for not signing
bill which he had not an opportunity to ex-
anime, when he had not even tine to learn
what appropriations had been made, and what
work had been performed. Now he comes
forward, after having had time, and presents
his views, which he might have presented to
Congress before if they had given him the bill
with q sufficient number of days to examine
| it on its merits.
Mr.. BINGHAM. Will the gentleman from
Mississippi allow me to ask him one question?