Evening star., 1922-11-19
10. o., NOVEMBER 10, 1922-PART 2
Powers of Federal Government
Challenged by Massachusetts

them the sop that they can share IN
tho aid that 10 offered II they will
match the appropriations con-
tributed by the federal govern
mont. Unwilling states are practi-
ealiy dragooned into accepting the
ernment dollars with their own. for
II they do not they will receive In
return no portion Of the income tax
which their citizens pay to the
general government. 1t appears
that three-fourths OF the tax
which 10 to be expended for the
purposes Of the law will be COL
these states shall accept the terms
Of the appropriation and retax
their citizens to the necessary ex-
tent they will receive less than IS
per cent Of the money they will be
compelled to pay to carry out the
provisions Of the law.
The legislation. however fine in
clearly unauthorized by any pfin-
cipls Of law unless It make for it's
bulwark that much abused gen.
eral welfare clause Of the federal
Constitution. Well may we ex-
claim. 20 General Welfare. in
thy name what crimes have not
been committed" We have swung
in the course Of our national ex-
istence from one end Of the arc
we'll defined proposition that there
should be no taxation without rep
reSentation. We end at the point
Of no representation without tax
ing the other fellow. Does any
one believe that tho federal Con-
stitution would have been adopt
ed II the taxation provided there
under had been Understood to be a
system whereby the rich and pow
erfui states were to have taken
from their property every year a
portion thereof to be applied to the
use and benefit Of the states that
were poor? Does any one doubt
that II the terms Of this maternity
law had been made. q condition
precedent to the adoption Of the
federal Constitution we would still
be struggling colonies. each seek
ing Its own interests? 1t took me
point OF consenting that the Con.
gress of the United States could
hold out either as q bribe or q
threat to the several states appro-
priations for good roads to induce
the state to make like appropri-
tions. So urgent. however, was
the manifest need Of good roads
tndS IHdIly IeCONCllcu my stotCs
rights conscience to the proposal
upon the theory that it was valid
under the power Of the government
to build post roads. But beyond
that point I never have thought 1t
constitutional or advisable to go.
II. under the general welfare clause
Of the Constitution. the maternity
act shall be upheld. then there is no
limit as to what the Congress may
do with reference to the expendi-
ture Of federal revenues upon mat
ters OF purely local concern. It's
determination by the Supreme
Court will mark an era In our
government. II the Massachusetts
petition shall be allowed and the
law Is declared unconstitutional.
then we shall have reached a point
where the expenditures Of the gen.
eral government may be reduced
by one third or one-half.
When I was q boy we knew that
the barberry bush had something
to do with wheat rot, but We did
not contend that northern Indi-
ana's wheat crop was of general
welfare to the whole United States.
So our farmers proceeded to cut
down their barberry bushes and
save their crops with the feeling
and belief that the bush and the
crop were matters Of local con-
Germ. But I lived to see the time
in the Senate of the United States
when the orange growers Of Cali
fornia and the potato growers OF
Maine were taxed to cut down bar
berry bushes in North Dakota.
If the maternity act is upheld
under the general welfare clause.
then there Is no limit, first. to the
power of federal taxation, and.
secondly, to the local purposes for
which federal taxes may be ex-
pended. National appropriations
can be made to erect delousing
plants for poodle dogs upon the
theory that fleas transfer them
selves to human beings. thus less
ening the peace and happiness of
a community and thus retarding
the general welfare Of the repub-
lie.
rc.,v-,.h+ 1ooe nv Thomas r. Marshall.o