Charles City intelligencer. [volume] (Charles City, Floyd County, Iowa) 1864-1866, 1866-05-17
NUMBER 20.

OF communication, 1t VIII receive the
support of the people of the west
ern States and the sanction Of their
Representatives
The gentleman from New York Mr..
j. Nj. Humphrey finds fault with this
measure because he can find in the Con-
stitution of the United States DO pow
er to pass it but if he will refer to the
measures that have been at various
times before Congress he will see that
it has become the uniform policy of the
Government to engage in these great
works of internal Improvement. There
has scarcely been Congress that has
not in some form or another recog-
nized this principle in our Legislation.
But the gentleman from New York
Mr.. j. NJ. Humphrey objects to this
measure because it is within the State
Of New York alone, because it does
not connect any two States, but the
whole Of the proposed improvement is
necessarily in the State of New York.
He seems to forget that it unites by
water communication the great chain
of lakes which float the commerce Of
many States and opens direct COM
munication with the ocean that bears
upon its bosom the commerce of the
world.
Now, | think this bill finds its sane
tion ill many provisions of the Consti-
tuition, as in the power "to regulate
commerce with foreign nations and
among the several States !" " to de-
clare war;" to raise and support ar
mics" "and provide for the common
Defence" to provide and maintain a
navy" &c. 1t is admitted that this
measure will be one of necessity for
the protection and defence of our
northern lakes should we come in con-
Aict with England
But the gentleman says we are not
likely to have a war with that country.
Why, sir, upon the principle he advo-
Gates we cannot cast cannon or build
fortiiication in time of peace, because
| it is not necessary except as war
measure. We could not build a ship
for the protection of our commercial
marine because we are not engaged in
war. Therefore it is that whatever is
necessary to control and protect the
commerce of our great northwestern
lakes and the States bordering upon
them as a war measure. the Congress
of the United States certainly has pow
er to adopt and it is the sole Judge If
the exigency which shall call for the
exercise of that power.
But another objection of the gentle
man is that it interteres with the prop
er local jurisdiction of the State of
New York. The gentleman from New
York will bear in mind that we are
constantly interfering with the local
jurisdiction of the States We have
done 1t in marked instance in the
the passage of u national banking law
whereby we controlled the moneyed in
tcrest and power Of this country by
the creation Of that act in the State OF
Iowa, which have the honor in part
to represent, a State bank system has
been utterly destroyed. Under the con-
stitution of that State a charter organ
izinS general banking system in that
State must be submitted 10 vote of
{
which had been thus submitted and
passed upon favorably and yet, un-
der the national banking law, our
State bank System has been utterly
driven out of existence, and without
the consent Of the State Legislature.
4 national system has been establish
| cd there III violation of our State poll
cy. So that we do interfere with the
local policy of States by our legisla-
ton here, and We have the constitu-
tional power to interfere when il is
necessary for the general interests OF
the Government, or to carry out the
specific powers granted in the Consti-
tuition.
| desire to say one thing with refer.
ence to the policy of the State of New
York on this subject of canals. say
that the policy which that State has
adopted is sufficient in itself to JUS
tify the Congress of the United States
in interfering with it by the adoption
Of this measure.
hold in my hand the proceedings
of the Canal Board of New York,
wherein they report to the Legislature
of that State that this Erie canal,
which the gentleman says cost $780,
600, instead Of beng a charge,
has actually been n heneGt t. that
State, and has placed in its treasury
50, 100000 over and above the money
expended for the construction of the
work, nearly ak OF which was levied
as contribution npon the grain-produ-
cling States of the West. And yet the
State of New York proposes now, by
its interference here, to prevent the
western States from transporting their
cereals across that State unless they
pay tribute to that State IN the way of
tolls such as ii may see proper to i'm
pose and it is for that reason and to
establish competing lire of transit
that this measure is proposed, for the
purpose Of deprlying them Of this mo-
nopoly of transportation between the
lakes and the sea, ......
l know, also, that the gentleman
from New York, Mr., j. NJ. Humphrey
when q member of the New York Sen
ate, introduced bhl ior the purpose of
cnlarging the Erie canal, showing that
he believes, that we do need addition
al facilities by which the cereals Of
the western States can be transported
to the city OF New York and TO the
markets OF the East. How did he pre-
pose to enlarge that canal p? He pro-
posed to do Ii by means of locks, which
were to pass vessels of six hundred
tons burden, and to levy upon the com-
merce of the western States seventy
cents on every ton transported through
that canal, in addition to the tolls lew
led by the State OF New York upon its
own citizens TO pay for its construc-
i tion and enlargement.
Now, that the very fact that il has
been the policy of the State Of New
: York to compel the produce of the
| Most tn mass thronph the Erie canal