The Birmingham age-herald., 1905-10-08
INTERSTATE COM MERGE,
History and Principle of Federal Reg
 uIation Discussed.

To The Editor of The Age-Herald: M
 The public is indebted to your columns for an earnest and highly instructive de- bate between two of our eminent consti- tutional lawyers, Senator Morgan and Colonel Denson, on the paramount ques- tion of federal control of interstate com merce.
 This debate in some form is as old as the Declaration of Independence, and even older, for at an earlier time the people of the colony of Pennsylvania, for instance, could not carry one pack horses beaver skin hats to the colony of Virginia for exchange for return load of tobacco, because the King of England required all the colonies to send all their exports in his ships to England
 From first to last, federal control of interstate commerce has been the control ling American idea of constitutional American government. Washington and his contemporaries foresaw with the wis., ion of the seer, that the blow, without the associa tion of the mill and common carrier, would be no more to the guns of the White Conqueror of the new world than the bow and arrow of the red pos- sessor
 Alexander Hamilton possessed the most acute intellect that has ever appeared in this country. In writing for the Annapolis convention of 17S6. an address to the states to convene in Philadelphia the next year to reorganize the federal system, he said; The power of regulating trade is of such comprehensive extent and will enter So far into the general system of the federal government, that, to give it effi- cacy, and to obviate questions of doubts concerning it's real nature and limits may require corresponding adjustment of other parts of the federal system" That single sentence is the whole thing in a nut she'll The confederation had fallen to pieces because it had no source of revenue; the new constitution adjust ed the life of the union to revenue by permitting a federal tax on foreign trade. The confederation had proved imperative because no treaties of commerce with for eign countries could be made while the federal authority was powerless to control the navigation acts of the separate states. MT. Jefferson, in soliciting the trade of France for America, was met with the taunt that Massachusetts and New Hamp- shire, for instance. had navigation laws so offensive to France that instead of cultivating their trade the French min istry was then thinking of retaliation.
 The federal right to regulate foreign trade and to regulate interstate trade. arose at the same time from the necessi tles of the federal government. The two rights are correlated in the nature of things. If, to Illustrate, the Port of Mo- bile by the laws of Alabama. sho,,Id admit bananas free while under the laws of Louisiana there was a tariff tax on that imported fruit, the Louisville and Nashville railroad, by fixing a higher rate on bananas received at Mobile over the New Orleans receipts, could effectually nullify the laws of Alabama, in respect to the banana trade.
 We have another instance of the intent Of the constitution to regulate trade. Im- ports may or may not be taxed at the pleasure of Congress. Exports however, cannot be taxed in any degree Now, if Congress had no authority over interstate commerce, could not Alabama, by statute, fix tax upon the railroads delivering freight at Mobile specially for export, which would be entirely tax upon ex-