Fort Worth weekly gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-01-13
REAGAN'S REASONS.
In His MAIDEN Speech In the Senate
the Texas Statesman Opposes
the Blair Bill.
The Nature OF the Measure and the Results
TO be Expected From 1t are
Clearly Explained.
Correspondence of the Gazette


delivered his maiden speech in the Senate
today on the Blair educational bill. He
took the broad ground that the bill was
entirely unconstitutional, and in the
course OF his remarks took occasion TO
say that should he vote for the bill which
carries 100000 for Texas for eight
years, he would feel as If he had voted to
annul the constitution of the United
States, the sheet-anchor OF our liberties
The following pertinent extracts from this
well considered speech, which WAS
listened to with attention, are given fol
the bensfit of the readers of THE Ga.
| ZETTE:
The result would necessarily be that
Congress would have to delegate very ex
teDsiye powers to the heads of depart
ments Of the government, end that we
should adopt system Of personal gov.
ernmert, not resting on the popular will
and controlled by just legal provisions,
but leaving the interests Of the public
and the rights Of the people to the
discretion and At the mercy of Cabinet
cfticers, not selected by the people, and
TOO fsr removed from them to be under
any direct responsibility tn them
This would be the very essence OF
despotism; it might be just and mild,
Or arbitrary, harsh, and unjust, according
to the character of the officer. Do hon
orable Senators feel prepared to go fur.
Their than We have heretofore gone, as the
passage OF this bill will require Us to do,
in assuming that the general welfare"
| clause Of the constitution is grant OF
power, and in centraliziDg the powers OF
this government, In destroying the rights
Of states IS they exist under the constitu-
ton, In changing the character of our
government, and In sacrificing the ubeT-
ties OF the people?
1t has been assumed in argument by
| many Senstors, 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. If presidents are
to take the place Of constitutional grants
OF power, then we might as
well regard the constitution as abro-
gated, for precedents not warranted
6y it's provisions may be found Gil along
through the history Of the government.
There would be no more wisdom Or JUS
tice in such an essump ion than for US to
conclude that the bad acts OF our private
lives should serve as precedents to eX-
cuse or justify other bad acts, and 1e-
tieve US from any obligation 30 obey the
moral law and the pTecepts OF Christian
ity.
But there are other answers to this
assumption that the giving OF lands justi-
ties taxing the people to give money for
educational purposes in the states. The
government lands are held IN trust by it
for the benefit OF the whole American
people, and it is simply discharged from
that trust pro tanto when it surrenders
portions Of them to aid in the cause Of
education. And IN ST cases, l believe,
when public lands or money the proceeds
Of the sales Of public lands have been so
appropriated, their use and applica-
ton nave been controlled by
the several states and territories by
their own laws and agents. II the Fed
eral government should attempt TO fol-
low its 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 speciti I'd in this bill. The
appropriations of land have been abso-
lutte. without provisions for reversfon to
the United States after the titles vested
and wholly freed from federal control.
Congress does not undertake to go
into the states with its laws and
It's 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 and other
state officers to conform their action in
the use Of such lands to the requirements
of federal laws, nor to report their pro-
ceedings TO any federal officer for his
approval or disapproval. And, beside
this, under article 4, section 3, clause 9
Of the co Institution, Congress has plenerY
and unlimited power to dispose Of the
public lands, while taxes csn only be levied
By the federal government to carry out
t5e purposes for which 1t WAS established,
IS have tried to demonstrate. This dis
tiGctioD, it seems to me, is conclusive
against the power of the federal govern
N ant to levy snd collect taxes TO support
schools In the states; and also against
the assumption that because Congress
has granted lands to promote education
in the states it can tax the people and
raise and appropriate money for the same
purpose.
ANALYSIS OF THE BILL.
The case Is entirely different with the
bill under consideration. TIE people are
to be taxed to raise the $40 100000 Fed
eral officers sre to be appointed to exam
inc aDd supervise the reports from al Of
the thirty eight states and nine or ten
territories. The people are TO be taxed il
addition to cover the cost of collecting
the above sum, and for the payment Of
the salaries, etc, Of the required officers
and clerks. And in large measure tie
money is to be collected from the people
of some of the states for the benefs of the
psople of other states. Il would bs
more equitable, and much less expensive,
for the citizens Of each state to pay the
tsxes to support their own schools, and
to collect those taxes By their own off,
GERS and OFF their own subjects of tax
ton.
Mr. Reagan said: l deny the constitu-
tional power of Congress TO pass such 8
law. Under our system of dual govern
ment, where the people are sovereign,
and where they are the goverDment-mak-
ing power, and where they have con-
ferred such powers as pleased them on
tae state and federal govern
m nts, respectively, and retained
to themselves such powers as they
chose to confer On either, it is SIS necesss-
~ for the law-making power under either
Of these governments to inquire into its
jurisdiction when attempting to legislate
as for courts Of Justice with special or
limited jurisdiction TO Inquire into their
Jurisdiction when they come to sdjudicate
q case.