The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-04-26

a comprehensive system of roads and
 canals such as will have the effect of drawing more closely together every part of our common country by promoting in- tercourse and improvement, and by in creasing the share of every part in the
 common stock of national prosperity" While Secretary of War in 1S19 MT. Cal
 houn made a report to the House of
 Representatives on roads and canals, in
 which he said:
 No object of the kind Is more im- portant and there Is none to which state
 or individual capacity is more inadequate. It must be perfected by the general gov 1 ernment or not perfected at all. It Is not necessary for the exercise or
 a power by the federal government that
 it should be expressly granted in the fed
 eral constitution, or that it should be
 "clearly and directly traceable to some 1 one of the specified powers granted.
 Any number of the powers granted, or all of them, may be combined and con- sidered together, and any power neees-
 sary to carry out the general purposes of
 any, or all, of the power specified, will
 be considered granted by implication, and as an incidental means of executing the powers specifically granted. (Pennsylya-
 nja vs Wheeling Bridge company, IS
 Howard GU. s., 42l.)
 Special Provision.
 The constitution, article 1, section 8, clause l. provides in part, that The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and
 excises, to pay the debts and provide for
 the common defense and general welfare
 of the United States
 An appropriation of money for the im- provement of the public roads of the
 country would certainly be for the general
 welfare of the United States, and 1t would
 seem that the Congress is clothed with ample authority, under this clause of the constitution to appropriate money for that purpose.
 In addition to this, Congress has
 stronger and more specific warrant for
 making this appropriation, under the au- thority conferred by the constitution ito
 establish postoffces and postroads."
 Cooley, in his book on Constitution Law, says:
 Every road within a state, including railroads, canals, turnpikes, and navigaole streams, existing or created within state, becomes a postroad, whenever, by
 the action of the postoftice department,
 provision is made for the transportation of the mails upon or over it"
 This provision of the constitution is growing every year in practical inn portance and in it's relation to the public roads, owing to the extension of the
 rural delivery service.
 On August l. 1882, President Arthur
 vetoed a bill making an appropriation for
 rivers and harbors but the commercial
 interests of the country, through organi-
 ga tions of boards of trade, chambers of commerce and other business assoela-
 tions had brought such pressure to bear uron Congress that sentiment was deyel- cped in favor of revving appropriations for rivers and !arbors, and this bill was promptly passed over the Presidents 1 veto.
 From that time on executive favor and aii constitutional argument seem to have l yielded in favor of appropriations for | river and harbor improvements; but, by
 q sort of passive acquiescence, 1t seems l to have gone against public roads and | highways; and yet the arguments accom- I pany.ng each of the veto messages, from
 President Monroe to President Arthur. ad-
 mitted that the principle of appropriating l money for roads and rivers and harbors l was the same and the same arguments 1 were used agaInst each If, then, appro- l priations for improving our rivers and narbors involving the same principle as appropnatiens for improving our roads, is constitutional. why will not an ap- 1 propriation for roads be constitutional? l What valid constitutional objection is
 there to the one which does not lie against l the ether?
 Highways of Commerce.
 Postroads and public highways are high ways of commerce, as much so as are railroads or rivers and harbors. They
 are the great arteries of our commercial
 body, which extend out into the country
 and gather up and bring to the market, l railroad station, and wharf the great l volume of the raw products of the c6un- l try, which are the real constituent ele- 1 rnents of our commerce. They are equally 1 indispensable to ou' commercial growth and &elfd.c, and are equally deserving l of the fostering care of our government 1 1t Is argued hy many that the question l of lad improvement should be left en- l tirely to tne people of the states. It is l argued that federal aid savors too much l of paternallsm, and, therefore, the gen. l eral government should leave it alone i; 1 but this objection is irrational and with l out foundation. It is not proposed to l appropriate money out of the national 1 treasury to aid the people in their pri-
 vate business. It proposes to appropriate
 public funds for public purpose, which l is not paternaism. Before any state can l secure it's share, or any portion of It's l share, of the money appropriated under l the federal aid proposition, it must first l show an equivalent amount Of self-help l and invite the cooperation of the gov
 ernment This will be a direct stimulus l to the states to put forth their very best | efforts Federal aid, therefore, instead 1 of stifling and causing a relaxation of | the efforts of the people of the states.
 places a premium upon their efforts 1 If the government should undertake to | furnish us, without cost or individual l effort, the necessaries of life, that would | be paternalism. If we were asking the | federal government to prescribe our daily bread or to provide us raiment to clothe | our bodies, that would be paternalsEl 1 pure and simple. Such a function of l the government would be enervating; it
 would destroy individuality and repress 1 all energy and ambition; but We ask no
 such fatherly care at the hands of our