Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-01-11
REAGAN'S REASONS.
In His Maiden Speech Ia The Senate
the Texas Statesman Opposes
the Blair Bill.
ghe Nature OF the n easure and the Results
TO be Expected From 1t are
Clearly Explained.
correspondence of the Gazette.

Fl
3 took the broad ground that the bill was
s entirely unconstitutional, ard in the
course OF his remarks took occasion to
ssy that should he vote for the bill which
carries 81 600, oOC for Texas for eight
years, he would feel as Il he had voted to
snnul the constitution Of the United
States, the sheet-anchor of our liberties.
The folio wing pertinent extracts from this
well considered speech, which YVES
listened to with attention, are given for
.he benefit of the readers of THE GA
ZETTE:
The result would necessarily be that
Congress would have TO delegate very ex
tensive powers TO the heads Of depart
pents OF the government, and that We
bnould adopt 8 system Of personal gov
ernment, not resting on the popular will
and controlled by just legal provisions,
but leaving the interests OF the puoIlc
snd the rights of the people to the
discretion and st the mercy OF Caolnet
officers, not selected by the people, ana
zoo far removed from them to be under
any direct responsibility IN tnem:
This would be the very essence OF
despotism; 1t might be just and milo,
or arbitrary, harsh, and unjust, according
70 the character of tue otficer. DO non
orsole Senators feel prepared to go lur-
ther than we have heretofore gone, as the
passage of Thu bill will require US 10 90.
In assuming that the general welfare"
clause of the constitution Is a grant OF
power, and in centraliziug the powers OF
this government, in destroying the rights
Of states as they exist under the constltu-
ton, in changing the character OF our
government, and in sacrificing the noer-
ties of the peopleP
1t has been assumed in argument by
rnany Senators, that because Congress
had granted lands for educational pur-'
poses it could also grant money for the
same purpose. If Congress had granted
lands for this purpose in the absence OF
the necessary AUTHORITY, such presidents
would not Justify the passing OF other
Unconstitutional acts. Ii presidents are
TO take the place Of constitutional grants
oE power, then we might as
well regard the constitution as sbro-
gated, for precedents not warranted
4 0y it's provisions msy be found all along
through the history OF the government.
There would be DO more wisdom or JUS
tice in such en- assn mp ion than f0r Us to
ives should serve as precedents to eX-
cuse or justify other bad acts, and re-
lieve rs from any obligation 10 obey the
moral Law and the precepts of Christian
ity.
But there are other answers TO this
assumption tnst the giving Of lands justi-
les taxing the people to give money for
educational purposes in the states. The
government lands are held in trust by 1t
for the benefit OF the whole American
DecS.e, and it is simply discharged from
that trust pro tanto when it surrenders
portions OF them to aid il the cause of
sducstion. Aud ~ sill cases, believe,
when public lands Or money the proceeds
Of the sales of public lands have been so
appropriated, their use and spplica-
lion nave been controlled By
the several states and territories by
their own laws and agents. If the Fed
ersl government should attempt to fol-
low it's land grants into the state and to
administer them there that would also
violate the constitution, but for differ
ent reason than for taxing the people for
The purpose specifi ID in this bill. The
sppropristions of land have been abso-
ute, without provisions for reversion to
The United States after the titles vested
snd wholly freed from federal control.
Congress does not undertake TO go
into the states with its laws and
its agents TO administer the land
so appropriated or the pro-
ceeds of the sales of such land, nor to re-
quire the governors of states snd other
state officers TO conform their action in
the use OF such lands to the requirements
u federal laws, nor to report their pro-
ceedIpps to any federal officer for his
soprovhI or disapprovsl. And. beside
this. under article 4, section ), clause
Of the co lsti,ution, Congress has plenarY
az unlimited power 10 dispose OF the
nubIic lands, while taxes can only be leVle
1y the federal government to carry GU
the purposes for which IL WAS established,
Is have tried to demops.rat This OILS
tIpCtion. It seems TO me, Is conclusive
sgsinsr the power of the federal govern
ment to lew and collect taxes TO support
schooJs in rhe states; and also against
he assumption that because Congress
lss granted lands 10 promote eoucatlon
N The states it can tax the people and
-alse and appropriate money for the same
purpose.
ANALYSIS OF THE BILL.
7.,a csse ia entirely different with the
all Under consideration. the people are
- he tsxed TO raise the S79 .0oO,00O Fed
lr.j officers sre to be sppointed TO exam
Inc ard supervise the reports from a.! q
the thirty. eight states ana nioe OF zen
territnrles The people are to be taxed In
edition IN cover the cost OF collecune
the above sun, and for the payment OF
f6e salaries. etc, Of the required ficers
and cIeTks Aud in 8 large measure the
money Is 70 be collected from the peopie
At some of the states for the oeneh. OF Inc
9 ~ S of other states. 1t would be
-noIe eonitable, and much less expensive,
s eaut tbe cIiiz~ns of each state to psy the
axes Az sst to support their own schools, and
=. -oA cn,I ~ those taxes by their own en-
s ,, and of their own subjects Oh Taxa
ton. sor, tho constitn.
.,o m, noger Of Congress to pass such s
I.w Toder our system OF ooai govsln-
mont where the people are sovereign
sad where they sre the gosefh h.Sa nnH
ing power, and where tney o, ns tbem 0o ~
tered such powers IS plessea 'ae anor OF
.Sa 49, sts,e and federal govern.
ments, respectively, SUI ,Ss1
70 themselves suca powers IS s,a aneS
chose TO confer on either, IL Is Is neosssa
for the lswmskiug power unag ;rs e'p ,..