The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1889-08-08
NATIONAL SUPREMACY.

The Washington Press comments
again ON what it pleases to term the new
departure of the Journal on the question
of State rights. The alleged new de-
parture consisted in a declaration that
as the Constitution was established to
promote the general welfare" and in
express terms gives Congress power to
provide for the general welfare of the
United States" the national government
therefore has power to do whatever may
be necessary to that end. The Journal
said:
During the war Congress exercised q
great many powers, and, with the aid of
the executive, abolished slavery. This in
reference with the domestic institutions of
the States was justified as military neces-
sity and the exercise of a war power. These
phrases are only another name for the pub
lie welfare, and the public welfare is as
paramount in time of peace as in time of
war. Whenever the public welfare de-
mands it the national government should
find or make a way for the exercise of its
power, whether In war or in peace.
We stand by that statement. 1t may
be somewhat in advance of any de-
cision of the Supreme Court or construc-
ton Of the Constitution yet made, but if
so, it only foreshadows future decisions
and the inevitable construction of the
Constitution in emergencies sure to
arise hereafter. There is nothing heret-
ical nor alarming in the doctrine an
nOunced. 1t is not even a new depart
ure. 1t is simply following exist
ing precedents and principles to their
logical conclusion. The object of the
Constitution is to hold the States to-
gether and form a national government,
and, no matter what emergency arises,
it must be construed as comforting on
the national government ali necessary
powers for Its own preservation. A
Constitution that should stand in the
way of the growth of the Nation or of
the exercise of any power by the ma
tiOnal government necessary to the pub
lie defense and welfare would be a
nuisance.
1t is wonderful proof of the political
wisdom and prescience of the trainers of
the Constitution that they were able to
formulate written instrument which,
with but few changes, has proved elastic
enough for the first hundred years of
our national existence, and has enabled
the national government to stand every
test thus far. But this has not been
done without the assertion and exercise
of latent powers in the Constitution
which its trainers never dreamed of. Nor
must it be supposed that the perils
oil our national existence are all passed.
There are more to come, though we can
not locate or define them now. When
they arise they will have to be met and
battled with as those of the past have
been, and if the national government
cannot find sufficient power to grapple
with them in the express terms of the
Constitution it will exercise the power
anyhow and the Supreme Court will rat
ify it by new construction. That is
the way constitutions grow and adapt
themselves to changing conditions and
necessities. A constitution that can
not or does not do this would be a
hindrance to natior al development and
a menace TO the public welfare. The
existence of the government, the life of
! the Nation, and the preservation of the