———gppp—^_ _lEMOCRJiCY, yy/iu CONSTITUTION, AND STATE RIGHTS.
Bv PLEAS AN IS & BUTl.KH.] RICHMOND, VIRGINIA. TUESDAY. MARCH 2. 1824. ' "" "
J r 1 lie Constitutional YVhio is published
twice u week, (Tuesdays' and Fridays',) at Jive dol
lars per annum, payable within six months, by all
who are original subscribers, or become so in ninety
days from this date, and in advance for all who
subscribe thereafter.
IL7* For advertising—fifty cents a square (or less)
for the first insertion, and 37 1-2 cents for each con
tinuance.—The number of insertions must be noted
on the Jtf. S., otherwise they will be continued and
charged accordingly.
O* Advertisements from ihe country to be paid
for in advance, or assumed by some responsible indi
vidual in this place or Manchester.
Hi* All letters to the Editors must be post-paid,
■or they will receive no attention.
¥»ig\\teentYi Congxeas.
SPEECH OF MR. TUCKER, OF VA.
On the BUI for obtaining the. necessary, Sur
veys on the subject of ids and Canals.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
February 3, 1824.
Mr. Tucker, of Va. said, that the gentleman
From N. York, (Mr. Storrsl would sec, from the
i speech of his colleague, (Mr. J. S. Barbour,)
I who had just sat down, that, with regard to the
t constitutional doctrines, which he had cousi
1 dcred as peculiarly Virginian, there was some
what of the same diversity in Virginia as in the
other States; and lie ought to have recollected
that the same doctrines hail been zealously sup
ported by ortc gentleman from his own State,
( Ur. YVood,) and another from Vermont, (Mr.
Alallary.) lie had, also, characterized the ar
guments, brought to support a rigid construc
tion of the Constitution, as Virginia metaphy
sics, and it was not the first time that the re
mark had been made in that house; but, if any
blanto was to be attached to letting the argu
ment l.iru on mere political abstractions, the o
ther side must come in for their full share, as
they had drawn the nicest distinctions between
municipal powers, and national and political
and various other species of powers. Mr. T.
said, he should not follow their example, both
because lie had no talent for that species of rea
soning, and because, after the proposition is es
tablished, that the power in question is munici
pal or national, or of any other particular class.
noinmg- is gaineu in the argument, and the par
ties are still lett to differ about the meaning of
the terms. He should keep clear of these re
finements, and endeavor to adhere, in the dis
cussion, to the dictates of plain common sense.
And, although he did not promise himself that
lie should change a single vote in tlie Commit
tee, it was possible that what he might say,
might have some effect elsewhere, andt though
it may fail to convince, it might excite some
traces of thought that may be improved by o
thers possessed of greater powers than his own.
Mr. T. said, he was sorry that so much time
had been expended, in this debate, to prove the
advantages of roads and canals. This was sure
ly unnecessary, in the present day. A large
portion of the labor of every country is expend
ed, not in producing useful commodities, but in
ctm**ving them from the parts where they are
redundant to those where they are wanted—and
the ^avmg, in this labor of transportatfcm. af
forded by toads and canals, often makes the dif
»ereube between a rich and a poor country.—
He wtuf 'a sensible of their advantages as any
one, and had been always roady to contribute
' his feeble aid in imparting them to tho State of
w hich he was a representative. But he was op
posed to the system of which the present bill
proposed to lay the foundation, not ouly be
cause it was beyond the sphere of the powers!
confided to us by the Constitution, but because’
he thought it of dangerous political tendency
with regard to the relative powers of the Gene
ral and State Governments, and unwise as a
measure of national economy.
Mr. T. said, he did not propose to say much
on the constitutionality of the bill, as that branch
of the subject had been already very fully and
ably discussed. He should, however, trouble
the Committee with some remarks on the clause
respecting post offices and post roads, in the ex
amination of which, he hoped he should be ex
cused for indulging in verbal criticism. In do
iug so, he should hut follow the example of the
Speaker—anti, indeed, when the meaning of a
clause in the Constitution turns on a single
word, as in this case, and its meaning is disput
ed, there is no other mode of ascertaining the
meaning of that instrument. Ho thought the
meaning could be missed only by too much sub
tlety and refinement, as many who might have
jouud gold, if they bad confined themselves to
the surface, had lost it by searching too deep for
uprai»;i uiscrauns an omer sources of
the power to make roads and canals, Ilian is to
be found in this clause. If it is here, it is given
by the word establish. He says, establish means
to originate and create, rather than to adopt or
designate. I, in part, agree with him, aaid Mr.
I. ; but it often signifies neither the one nor the
other. The simple import of the word is, to
give stability to, and the object thus made sta
ble, may originate at the same time, or it may
not. Mr. T. here gave several illustration of
the meaning of the won!, in all of which, it sig.
nified to give stability of some kind—of truth, or
certainty, or law. In no ease oflegialation does
it import a physical act, but merely to give to
some subject the stability of law. But, if it be
admitted that it. is synonymous with make or
create, it would not advance the purposes ofthc
5W*gii;nent, as it would simply mean, to create by
legislative enactment.
Nor lias the Speaker adverted to the differ
ence between establishing a road and a post
road. The .State might make the road, while
the act of Congress marie the post-road, which
distinction Mr. T. further liberated by exam
ples. If any doubt, said he, exists on this sub
ject, the sense in which the word ha3 been inva
riably used by the legislature, from the origin of
the government, ought to be considered as the
correct one; & our statute book is filled with in
stances of post roads that have lx:en established,
though no roads have been made. But, a"-ain,
Mr. Chairman, the word establish has not a
stronger signification than the words abolish or
discontinue, which arc used in contradistinction
to it; and yet, when wc speak ofdiscontinuing
a post road, no one considers it as stopping up,
or even discontinuing, the road itself, but mere
ly as depriving it of the property of being the
channel of conveyance for the mail, which the
law had imparted to it; and, in like manner, to
establish a post road is nothing more than to
give to a road the same property.
Mr. r. said that, in expounding the consti
tution, he had made it a rule, ever since he had
had a scat on that floor, to avoid refinements of
construction as much as possible, and to under
stand the language as it was used by persons of
plain common sense; and this for two reasons—
one was, that its wise framers no doubt intended
1 i.it the words of an instrument which was made
m the name ofthc people, and meant to acton
the people, should be taken in their popular sig
niGcation ; and another reason was, because, on
all controverted questions about the consritu
• tion, the people, from whom ail power is denv
: ed, must be, at their elections, if uo where else I
its final arbiters and expounders. Let us then I
apply this rule of construction. What are the i
words that would iiave been probably used if the '
constitution had meant to give, the power con-'
tended for ? These would Iiave been make or i
construct, and not establish; and let me ask, if
one was to inquire who established a particular !
post road, would the inquiry be understood to
apply to the construction of tho road itself, or
to the property or quality wliich the law had
imparted to it> Would any oue think of the
spades and shovels by which the road was made,
or merely of the legislature which had convert
ed it into a mail route ?
But again, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. T. the
power of constructing roads, insisted on by the
advocates of this bill, is a much greater power
than that of making them the chinnels of con
veying the mail. It is greater in the cost of
executing it, and greater in its bearings and
consequences. A gentleman from Pennsylva
nia (Mr. Stewart! has told us, that the expense
of transporting the mail on the Cumberland
road was formely sixty dollars per mile, (now
reduced to thirty,) but the cost of constructing
it has been, I believe, upwards of ten thousand
per mile, tke interest of which is ten rimes the
cost of transporting tho mail. Nbw, supposing
the words to be ambiguous in their meaning, is
it reasonable to construe them to give the larger
power, when the smaller will satisfy the words,
and when the framers of the constitution could
so easily have used the unequivocal language of
making or constructing roads, if it had been
their intention to give such power ?
Mr. T. then remarked, that perhaps he had
said more than was necessary to show, that this
clause did not speciGcaJly give the power to
construct roads, as nearly all the gentlemen who
had followed the Speaker, had virtually given
up this point by deriving the power from some
other part of the constitution, Bui some, who
could not persuade themselves it could lie found
iu the right to establish post road', think that it
may De found in that clause winch gives all
powers that are necessary and proper i'or carry
ing the specific powers into execution; and
that the power to construct roads is a necessa
ry j»ower to give effect to the power of establish
ing- post roads, iu the limited sense in which we
understand it. Dut, said Mr. T. the constitu
tion was made for men and tilings as they are,
not as they possibly might be. It did not mean
to provide fir extreme and highly improbable
cases, and 1 entirely concur with the Speaker,
that it is unlair to test the constitution by remote
possibilities. Those who framed it, knew, that,
wherever there were people, there were roads;
that these must, necessarily, go hand iu hand
with settlement and population ; that their own
convenience, their necessities, would compel
them to make roads to their ordinary markets,
their court-houses, their places of worship._
Sir, our whole territory, is intersected with roads,
and there is not, perhaps, a square of three
miles in the United States, having a population
ot ten persons on it, in which there is not a road
sufficient tor transportation of the mail. No
thing, then, can bo more unnecessary than such
a power in Congress ; and w u wc rernembe
with what a cautious and jealous spirit power
was doled out to the general government by the
states, it may fairly be presumed that, if they
had imagined the case in which the general
government had wanted a road in opposi
tion to the wishes of the state through which it
was to pass, they would not have granted the
power. Sir, no questions excite more interest,
or are litigated with more warmth, than disputes
about roads.—In Virginia, contests concerning
them are often carried on through all the courts,
from the highest to the lowest; and the ques
tion is not there, as it commonly is in more thick
ly settled countries, who shall have a road near
him, but who shall get rid of it, because it often
imposes on the landholder the burthen of addi
tional fencing.—When they found that the ex
ercise of a jurisdiction by their own courts ex
cited so much heart-burning and contention a
inong the people, it is one of the last powers
they would havo surrendered to a government
that was new, and in a manner foreign to them.
Sir, in such extreme cases as have becu sup
posed to show the necessity of this power, we
must always rely on the discretion and good
sense of those on whom the constitution was in
tended to operate, and it was no more necessary
to provide for them on this subject, than it was
to provide for compelling the states to choose
Senators or Electors. They will do so for their
own sakes, and the moment a law for that pur
pose becomes necessary, it ceases to have opera
tion, and the government becomes dissolved.—
Against these remote contingencies, the good
sense and good feelings of the |>eople arc the on
ly security.
But> it has been said, that* if Congress do not
possess the power of making roads, a state may
obstruct the mail when it pleases. But, can any
thing he more improbable than the supposition
that the people will deny themselves the conve
nience and benefits of the -mail, of hearing from
distant friends, of corresponding on business, of
gratifying their curiosity, for the mere purpose
of thwartiug the General Government ? Sir,
in the times of the most violent party spirit, in
the hottest opposition that the government lias
ever experienced, no one, not even the Hart
ford Convention, would have purposely given a
ny obstructions to the mail. They were all
anxious to get the Dews ; and it is absurd, (ifso
indecorous an expression may be allowed,) to
suppose, that men arc to act against their most
natural feelings* and their plainest interests_
If, however, there should be occasional instan
ces of wilful obstruction, the law may act on
the individual, and that affords sufficient securi
ty to the interests ot the general government.
Mr. T. said it was unnecessary to take up
further time on this clause , he would, howe
ver, before he dismissed it, make a single re
mark, in reply to the gentleman from New York,
(Mr. Storrs,) who had supported the Speaker’s
construction of this clause. In one particular,
said Mr. T. I agree with him. If, to artahlith
means to create, I admit that he has established
the principle he insists on; for, it is not to he
found in the Constitution. But this is a sense in
which I believe few will concur with us.
Mr. T. now adverted to tho power of regula
ting commerce, from which the gentleman from
Delaware, (Mr. McLane,) derived the power
of constructing roads, and said, that he should
not attempt to answer the ingenious arguments
of that gentleman, both because he had not
found leisure to investigate this branch of the
snbject, and because he anticipated a full and
satisfactory answer to it, from one of his col
leagues, who would follow him in the debate.
He would, however, remark, that, if that gen
tleman had trusted less to political abstractions
and technical distinctions about the different spe
cies of power, and consulted the good sense for
which he is so distinguished, he would have
been conducted to very different conclusions.
He bad given an extent of signiiication to tlie
word “ regulate,” which was justilicd neither
by the import of the word itself, by tlie history
of the Constitution, nor by other parts of that
instrument. Mr. T. said he would call the at
tention of the gentleman from Delaware, to a
clause that had not been adverted to in debate,
and would appeal to his candor, whether it did
not present a serious difficulty to his coustruc
tionofthe Constitution. That gentleman de
rives the right to make roads, from the right
to regulate tlie internal commerce between the
states, by land as well as by water; but a
clause in the 9th section of the 1st article, pro
hibitits Congress from making any discrimina
tion in favor of the purts of one state, over
tlio.se of another. And it is fair to presume,
that they might have given such preference,
but for the prohibition. Now, if the gcutlcman
from Delaware is right, that we have the right
of regulating internal commerce between tlie
states, it follows, that Congress tnay make un
just discrimination in the interior of the coun
try, which they are restrained from making at
the ports. There can be no reason for this dis
tinction. The states meant to secure to them
selves perfect equality, on this delicate and im
portant subject* But, to what purpose forbid
discriminations at the ports, if it could be made
on roads and canals ? The only answer that
can be given, is, that the commerce on the lat
ter was never contemplated, and the coasting
trade was all that was intended by the trade be
tween the states. The gentleman from Dela
ware also said, that if Congress, under its ex
press power to regulate commerce among the
states, had not also the power to facilitate it, by
making roads and canals, it would be in tlie
power of any state to obstruct the trade between i
other states, which passed through it; but there
was sufficient protection against this mischief,
in that clause of the Constitution which secures
to the citizens of one slate, the privileges of
every other, taken along with that regard
whicli every state may he expected to have to
its interests. The evil was too remote and im
probable, to have male the power contended
for, necessary, or to furnish any aigument for
its existence.
As to the power of Congress to make war,
to raise aud support armies, Mr. T. said, lie
could not see how that could be made to give
the power to adopt a system of Internal .Im
provement. It is true, it may be occasionally
necessary to make a road or canal to a fort or
an arsenal, but in this case, the road or canal is i
a mere appendage to the military work. It is, i
in fact, a part of the work itself. Yet that cir- \
on instance can no more give a power to make
roads or canals over the whole Union, than to
extend any other operation which the govern
ment may find it convenient to carry on, within
the limits of their exclusive jurisdiction. Such
a power cannot be necessary to the exercise of
the military power, as wc have raised and sup
ported armies in two wars, without making
roads and canals ; nor has any nation in Europe
found the direct exercise of this power, though
it is indubitably possessed, essential to its mili
tary operations, except in the way that it has
been exercised here, during the temporary exi
gencies of war.
But, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. T. if wc had
this power, there seem to be strong reasons why
/we should not exercise it. And I would ask
'the further patience of the Committee, while I
offer some objections to the bill which seem to
fne to deserve their serious consideration. It is
Very clear, that if we engage in a general sys
tem of internal improvement, it will bring with
it an extensive exercise of internal legislation.
Large sums of mcney must be drawn from the
people, and be again expended in the construe*
tion of roads and canals. It must take a good
deal, also to keep tlicin iu repair, as every rain
that falls, and every frost, does them more or
less of injury. The consl ruction and superin
tendence of these public works will require a
long tnrfn of officers—for it is conceded that tho
United States are, themselves, to construct
roads and canals, and not by the agency of in
corporated companies—and you can act only bv
the means of delegated power. There must
also be new tribunals erected to enforce the nu
merous contracts which the system implies, and
to punish the injuries to which the works will be
exposed, as^the State Courts refuse to exercise
jurisdiction under your laws. All this apparatus
must occasion a prodigious accession to tho pow
er and influence of the General Government,
and especially to the Executive branch of iK
Mr. Chairman, our system of government is ad
mirably adapted to our circumstances. No
nuiiircuuia swuruiue uiussings ui civil noeriy
to so extensive a territory, with such diversified
interests. Hut it is evident that its preserva
tion depends upon some very delicate circum
stances, which are necessary to maintain the
just equilibrium between the power of the Gen
eral Government and that of the States. It is
a problem yet to be solved, to which of the two
opposite dangers, of consolidation and disunion,
wc are most exposed. 1 know that some of the
most patriotic and far-sighted men in the nation
have differed on this question. In forming our
opinion on it, we can draw no lights from history,
and have to rely solely on our own powers of re
flection and sagacity. Hut whatever may have
been the relative strength of the two powers at
the adoption of the Constitution, there i.-. an ob
vious cause for the continual increase in the
power of the General Government to he found
in the multiplication of the states. As the
number of these increases, tin* relative weight
of each proportionally diminishes. Thus Vir
ginia, when the General Government first went
into operation, was about one-sixth of the Union,
now she is not more tliau one-tenth. Virginia
and Maryland together have not more relative
weight than Virginia had alone. Hut it is
clear that the same power, divided between
two states, cannot act with the same effect as
when it is united in one—and that they are not
likely to act as efficiently in opposing the mea
sures of the General Government, either by
means of their Representative-*, or by operating
on public opinion. Even if wc suppose them
actuated by the same views, arid c .-operating in
the same course of opposition, stiil the jealousies
and disseutions of allies a. e proverbial, and arc
founded in the strongest principles of our nature.
And whether the object of tiie General Govern
ment be to pass a sedition law, to repeal a judi
ciary law, to incorporate a hank, or to adopt a
system of roads and canals, the opposition which
the states may be dispo-od to make to these
measures, as unconstitutional, mmt he weaken
ed bv dividing among the several states the
power which had been previously possessed by
one. In that case, the causes of dissension may
be as strong as the motive? to union. It is thus,
Mr. Chairman, as it seems to me, that the pow
er of the general government is continually in
creasing.
But perhaps it may be said that this effect of
the addition of new states was foreseen, and
taken into account by the Us men. of the Con«t:tu
tion. But this could not hare been the case.
When the Constitution was adopted, the {Mis
sissippi was our boundary, aud the acquisition of
that exteu-uve and fertile country west of it,
which is to have so much effect in altering the re
lative weight of any oue state* was at that time
never dreamt of. Air. T. here remarked, that
New York presented a case directly opposite to
that of Virginia. She had once b^»t one-tenth
of the political power of the Union, and she ,
now has one-sixth. But the last Census shews !
that this increase, iu her relative strength, can- ;
not go on. It Iras receiv ed little accession in j
the last ten years, as 28 members on this floor ‘
bear nearly the same proportion to 185, as her:
present number, '.Mi, bears to 213; and l inay
veuture to predict that, iu ten years more, or if
not in ten iu twenty, as the vast and fertile
Valley of the Mississippi tills up the numbers it
ii one day deitined to support, her proportionate
weight in the Union will begin to diiniuisb,
i hough her actual numbers may go on iucreasing. ;
My colleague, said Mr. 'I', who has just sat
down, lias adverted to tlie opposition made to
tbe General Government during the late war—
and this furnishes ine with another illustration.
Sir, if tho State of .Maine had been then sepa
rated from Massachusetts, it can hcaivcly be
doubted that her weight, instead of living added
to the opposition, would have been thrown into
the scale of the General Government. She
would have operated as an antagonist power to
her parent state, and rendered her ellbrt harm
less.
Nor is this ail. The relative powers between
the Representative and the Executive branch
es of this government, areoflittlelessimportance
Ahan that between the General and the State Go
vernment1;. The appointment of- so many offi
cers, and the establishment of so many courts,
l.as a general system of internal improvement sup
poses, must make a very great addition to the
power and patronage of the Executive, and ma-j
teriallv affect that equipoise which the constitu
tion intended. Nothing would be more likely
to affect the independence of this House, than
the circumstance that every member had in his
district from fitly to an hundred persons holding
lucrative offices, at the pleasure of the President
who would be always ready to oppose him when
he opposed the Executive. Sir. said Mr. T.
to judge of this influence, let us look into the
history of the National Legislature, and without
wishing to be understood as alluding to tbe pre
senttime, or to any individuals, I will venture to
say, that the most complaisant supporters of the
' existing administrations, will he found to have,
come from the seaports, where there are collec
tors and tide-waiters and others, holding offices
at the pleasure of the Executive. There will
no doubt be found exceptions, but such is the
general rule; and if this has been the effect al
ready, what'wil! it be when the President of the
United States shall be the chief magistrate of
fifty or an hundred millions of people ? The
lustre of the office of President increases, not in
proportion to the increase of patronage, but in
a much higher ratio. It is with this, as with
the diamond—double the quantity may give ten
times the value. When the accessions of power
and dignity to the Executive of the United
States must necessarily be so great, and when
they have such an imposing effect on the minds
of men, ought we not to be very cautious how
we increase them ?
But, said Mr. T. gentlemen seem to have
taken it for granted, that the General Govern
ment is more able to effect internal improve
ments, than tlie several States. But I think
the proposed system as unwise on the score of
national economy, as it is mischievous in its po
litical tendency. The power of the General
Government to improve the whole Union is uot
greater than that of each State to improve its
own territory. Sir, if this system is adopted,
the money drawn from the community appropri
ated to its execution, will be fairly distributed
among the several States, or it will not. If we
suppose unfairly, that will be a fruitful cause of
jealousy and discontent, and furnishes a suffi
cient objection to the measure. But, if it is to
be distributed in just proportion, there can be
no advantage to the several States, for the whole
can be but equal to all it3 parts. Thus if you ex
pend half amillion in the state of Virginia, which
you had previously drawn from the peoplo of
Virginia, wherein is she a gainer by the opera
iion ? Nor can tbe General Government pro
cure that minute and accurate local informa
tion which is required by the system, as easily
a-; the States. But, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. T. I
consider any plan of making roads and canals1
by the direct agency of the Government, as un
wise. u laites away tne nest security against;
rash and unprofitable schemes of improvement.
The sagacity of individual self interest, is es-j
sential to guard against the waste of the national
capital. There are several monuments of this
danger in Europe. If my memory does not de
ceive me, one is afforded by Spain, and another
in the North of Europe in which, after the re
spective Governments had expended millions in'
attempting some improvement of navigation,
the works were found to houseless. Nor let it
he supposed that we aro exempt from a similar
danger. We inavall rereembi r that, after two
or three hundred thousand dollars were exf>end
ed in fortifying the battery of New-York, it
wasdiscovcrcd that the work wa3 of no value as
a national defouce, and we gave it back to the
State, without being able to get paid for the va
lue of the materials. .Such an error as this was
less likely to have been committed by a State,
and still less bv an individual. If we engage in
this magnificent scheme of internal improve
ment, must we not always be liable to be de
ceived and misled, when our local knowledge
in our extensive country, must be so imperfpcf,
and when so many will be interested in making
misrepresentations? Sir, let it be knowu that
the twenty millions, which was the sum recom
mended by Mr. Gallatin, are provided for inter
nal improvement, and, my life for it, this city
will swarm with hundreds of projer.tors, with
their maps and plans, beautifully illuminated,
electioneering for business ; and, as they would
succeed according to their address, and means
of conciliating favor, the result would be, that
we should have roads without travellers, and
canals without navigation, and perhaps with
out water.
Sir. raid Mr. T. gentlemen may object that
: New-York has furnished an example that a go
vernment is not unfit to execute these great
undertakings. It is true that New-York has
achieved a splendid work at her own expense—
but be was not sure that a private company
would not have executed it at a less cost. Sir,
said Mr. T. I wish not to undervalue the merit
to which New-York is entitled for her great
Western Canal. I thank her for furnishing so
conclusive a proof that this bill is unnecessary ;
rbut let not genfclmen from that State be startled
if I yet express a doubt whether that great work
was not premature; I know that it is of prodi
gious benefit to those who live near it; but still,
it may be que'.tioned, whether it was precisely
the mosf udxp.rdagerGn inode In wbrrhthe e»p
ital of the State could be expended. The cost
of the caual has been, I understand, about six
millions, the animal interest on which, is three
hundred thousand dollars. Now, I believe, the
amount of tolls last year, was but one hundred
thousand dollars, ironi which are to be de
ducted the cost of management and repairs,
leaving, probably, little more than an interest of
about one and a half per cent.
And this, Mr. Chairman, said Mr. T. brings I
me to notice the remark of the gentleman who 1
introduced this bill (sir. Hemphill.) who, aware !
of the objections that would arise from the small
profit offered by sonic of the projected cauals, j
said, that a caual may be profitable to the com- !
munity, though it may not be so to the stock- |
holders. Ibis proposition is sometimes true,!
bulit must be received with much allowance and
caution. It is true, where the tolls are notasgreat
as the saving in the labor of transportation
would justify. But, wherever this saving of
labor is not sufficient to yield a profit as well to
those who make the canal as to those who use it,
yre may saioly prdaounec that a country is not
ripe for it.
G.eat stress was laid by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania, on the canals of England. But,
Mr. T. said, he thought their example might
have furnished that gentleman with a stronger
argument against the policy of the system he re
commended than in its favor. It is not enough
for him to rely on the superior cheapness of wa
ter over land carriage. Sir, the construction
ol a canal may be a good or bad thing according
to circumstances. It is very advantageous in a
rich and thickly settled country to exchange the
surplus products of the different parts, and tore
licve their reciprocal wants ; but in a country
that is poor, and thinly settled, and passing
through barren mountains, in which there is no
thing to exchange, it would be a mere waste of
the national capital. Of the four thousand miles
ol canal of which England can boast, and the
eighty or an hundred thousand miles'bf road, if
she has so many, I believe I am warranted in
saying, not ouu mile was ever made by the go
vernment. Their turnpike roads and canals
are always made by joint stock companies,
and whenever one would be really benefi
cial, individual capital and enterpise are always
found ready to engage in the undertaking. And
can it be supposed, if the system now proposed
was a good oue, that that Government, which
so well understands its interests, especially its
Icoinmercial interests, would not have discovered
its advantages ?
It may, however, be objected that, from the
redundancy of private wealth and capital, in
that country, their system of making roads and
canals, by incorporated companies is easy and
proper, while here, frotn the scarcity of capi
tal, it is impracticable. But, so long, Mr. ( hair
man, as your government can borrow money at
five per cent, and your bank stocks yield an an
nual profit of but G or 7 percent, there will be no
diffiiculty in finding men ready to undertake any
road or canal that will yield something like the
same interest. It is to no purpose to say that
the natural interest of money is higher in this
country than it is in England—for, be that- na
tural interest what it may, whether you suppose
it six, eight, or ten per cent, if your road or ca
nal do not afford that profit, it shows that the
country Is not ripe for that undertaking, and
that the money required to execute it, will find
some more profitable employment, if left in the
hands of the people. Let, however, any road,
or canal be proposed, whose profit will repay the
cost, according to the standard of the country ;
and, be assured, sir, there will be no difficulty in
procuring the money to execute it.
The advocates for the system of Internal im
provement insist that the constitutional power
of the States is not sufficient to execute those
great works, in which the interests of several
states, or perhaps of the whole nation, are in
volved. But there is no dfficulty on this sub
ject, whether the proposed road or canal passes
through one state or many. It has been re
peatedly stated, intlic course of the debate, that
two or more states cannot enter into a compact,
but the prohibition in the constitution extends
only to treaties. The 2d clause of the 10th sec
tion 1st art. of the constitution expressly recog
nizes their right to make compacts with the
consent of Congress, and it can hardly he sup
posed. that if they wished to enter into a com
pact for the purpose of making a canal, Congress
would refuse its consent. But, if you were to
I refuse.they may act independently of you. They
can effect their object by concurrent acts of
I their own legislatures. On this subject, I do
not speak from speculation, but from actual his
tory. The state of which I am a representative,
united with the Stale of North Carolina to im
prove the navigation of the Koanoke, and by
concurrent legislative acts, without asking
your consent, they incorporated a joint stock
company, which has lately accomplished its ob
jects. The States of Maryland and Virginia have
in the same manner united in making the Poto
mac Canal.
Mr. T. said, that, before he sat down, he
would call the attention of the committee to tlic
celebrated report of Mr. Gallatin, on which
some of the advocates of this bill had so much
relied. It would appear that the power which
they now deem so clear, it was then taken for
granted, Congress did not possess, (and here he
read a passage from the report.) He thought
this ought to produce in their inindssome doubts
whether they really possessed this power.
Hut, if we had the power, and no dangers
were to he apprehended to the just equilibri
um which ought to exist among the different
branches of our complex system of government,
still the example of England ought to teach us
that the proposed plan of making roads and cn
ualsisnota wise one. Me had much more to
say,hut he had already trespassed too long on
ihe patience of the committee. Me hoped the
committee might be induced to take some of his
suggestions into consideration ; and he begged
them to remember that our legislation at the
present tunc went far to give to our government
its future character; that this nation was, as yet,
comparatively in its infancy, and “ as the twig
is bent the tree’3 inclined.”
IN SENATE.
Ti esday, February, 24.
A message (which shall be published at large in
to-morrow’s paper,) was received from the President
of the United States, relative to the claim of tHe state
of Massachusetts for pat'ment for militia services
rendered during the late war with Great Britain ;
which message was read and ordered to be printed.
A communication was received from the Trea
sury Department, transmitting a statement of the
situation of the several Banks within the District of
Columbia.
Mr. Hnyne presented the petition of Peter Tra
van, praying that his accounts with the Treasury
Department may be settled on equitable terms ;
which settlement is prevented by the loss of docu
I mentg. Rc erred to the Committee on Finanro.
Mr. Barton, from the Committee on Public Lands,
i - "fiovr-H fb<* ii’,1 {'rpjyt'rr.rnfrrr’t to llrr -^‘trul arft for
u --—-- *»•
the settlement of land claims at Si. Helena Court
House, in Louisiana, with an amendment.
Mr. Lloyd, of Maryland, presented the petition aC
Benjamin W. Bassett, praying coni|)cnsation for
work done for the accommodation of the Court.—*
Referred to tlio Committee on the District of Colum
bia.
The bill from the other House, making appropria
tions for the pear 11124, was twice read and referred
to the Committee on Finance.
Hie bill from the other House, sanctioning and
eon firming certain ads of the territorial legislature
of t lurid a ; was read, and passed to a second read*
ing.
The unfinished business of yesterday, being the
consideration of the Report of the Judiciary Com*
mittec, adverse to the petition of Ebrnezer Oliver
and otliers, ot Boston, was taken up, and postponed
till Thursday next.
Mr. Noble, from the Committee on Pensions,
moved that the Committee be discharged from the fur
ther consideration of the petition of Cornelius Hew
yon. inis petitioner prays the allowance of a pen
sion, in cousequence of wounds received by a full on
the ice, while engaged in the trausportimqn offo
vage for the United States’ troops t by which, as he
states, he has been disabled from labouring for hi#
support. The Committee w<fe accordingly discharg
ed.
Mr. King, of Alabama, from the Committee on
Public Lands, submitted a report on the petition of
the heirs of Don ilarpin De la Gautrais, accompa
nied bv a bill for their relief. The bill was react^
and passed to a second reading.
The resolution submitted yesterday by Mr. Bar
ton, requesting information from the President of
the United States, in relation to the measures that
have been taken, to lay before the Senate the origi
nals or copies of contracts for surveying public lands
in Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas, was again read,
and agreed to.
On motion of Mr. ^ anBureu.tlie Senato proceed
ed, as in committee of the whole, Mr. Gaillard in
the chair, to consider the bill authorising letters pa
tent to be issued to Samuel Broxrn. This bill canre
from the other House, and was reported by the Ju
diciary Committee of the Senate, without amend
ment. It authorizes a patent to be issued to Samu
el Brown, for a certain valuable invention, in which
several Americans are interested with hint, but which
cannot be patented, except by a special act, in con
sequence of the inventor not having resided in this
country the requisite number of years. Mr. Van
Buren stated the grounds upon which the bill was
founded. It was then reported to the Senate with
out amendment, and passed to a third reading.
On motion of Mr. Noble, the Senate then pro
ceeded to the consideration of Executive business;
and, after the doors were opened.
I lie bill supplementary to “ An act to perfect cer
tain locations and sales of the public land in Missou
ri" passed April 26, 1822, and the bill to repeal, in
pari, an act, entitled “ An act to lessen the compen
I cation for marshals, clerks, and attorney*, in (be ca
ses therein mentioned," were severally taken up in.
committee of the w hole, reported to the Senate, aud
passed to a third reading.
The Senate then resumed the consideration of tho
bill to abolish imprisonment for debt. After some
remarks on the subject, from Messrs, Lloyd, of Mas
sachusetts, Barbour, and Johnson, ot Kentucky, the
further consideration of it \.as postponed till U»
morrow
The Senate adjourned till to-morrow.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.
Mr. McLanc, from the Committee of Ways and
Means, reported a bill authorising an npprOjnialUm
fur the use if the Library of Congress; which was
twice read and committed.
Mr llarvey, from the Committee on Naval Af
fairs, made an unfavorable report on the petition of
Joseph Cross ; which was laid on the table.
Mr. Rankin, from the Committee on the Publm
Lands, to whom was referred a hill from the S-en.ite
“ to regulate the surveys of public and private lands
in the Southern part of Alabama," rcpoi ted the same
without amendment. The bill wa> ordered to a third
reading.
Mr. Saunders, from the Committee on the Judici
ary, to whom was referred the amendments proposed
by the Serrate to the bill «• to alter the limes of hold
ing the District Court at -Mobile, in (be District of
Alabama reported tire same with an agreement to
those amendments.
Mr. Moore, of Alabama, moved a further amend
ment, inserting the word w Hlount" immediately af
i *er *he word “ Morgan,” in the list of counties in tho
1 Northern District; which was agreed to, and tho
bill was ordered to a third reading.
Mr. Reynolds, from the Committee to w hom the
case of W illiam Blunt was referred, made an unfa
vorable report on his petition : which w as laid on
the table
Messrs. Bartlett and Dwinell presented mcmoriakl
on the subject of the Tariff.
1 lie resolution of Mr. Owen being Again called
up, and the question being put on the amendment
of Mr. Sharpe, inserting “the Secretary of the Trea
sury,” in place of “ the Committee of Ways and
Means,” it was decided in the affirmative, Ayes, BO,
Noes 6f), and the question being on adopting the re
solution as nmended, the Yeas and Nays were call
ed for. Before taking the Yens and Nays, Mr. Mc
Lanc, of Delaware,oflercd a further amendment, in
serting after the word Resohcd, “Thatthe ronnnit
lec of the w hole he discharged from the further con
sideration of the bill, and that it be referred to the
Secretary of the Treasury, with directions to report,”
&c.
Mr. MeLanc stated his reason for offering the o -
mendmrnt to be, that, if the resolution were dirt st
ed to that office, it must of necessity be accompanied
with the subject matter on which he is to report.
Mr. Sharpe opposed the amendinant, as calculat
ed to embarrass the proceedings on the bill.
Mr. Hamilton supported the amendment, as it
would be a loss of time to go on with the bill, while
it was referred for consideration to an Officer of the
House.
At the suggestion of Mr. Storrs. the resoluton was
so amended as not to discharge the committee fron*
the discussion, but to furnish the Secretary with u
copy of the bill.
Mr. Mangmn, while professing his general objec
tions to the bill, supported the amendment and reso
lution now offered, as a measure of fairness, tending*
to bring light upon the discussion.
Mr. On cn protested against all intention ofretard
ing the discussion, and assented to the arm mlment us
now proposed.
The question being taken on Mr. McT.ane’s a
memlmcnt, it was decided in tin affirmative—ayes
Mr. Rich offered a farther amendment, to strike
out the words “ of the government,'1 and insert after
*’ revenue, the words “ the commerce, and manufao
taring, and agricultural interests of the United
States.”
Mr. Rich supported his amendment by a few ob
servations. signifying that revenue was not the on
ly interest to be considered in the legislation of Con
gress.
Mr. McDuffie apposed this amendment as imposr
ing duties which had no reference So the official du
ties of the Secretary of the Treasury.
Mr. Owen followed on the same side, and seemerf
to consider the amendment as intended either to ri~,
dicule or evade the object of the resolution.
Mr. Floyd objected to the whole couise pTonowJ.
He thought it was not consistent with the dignity of
the House, to go for information, and for the ’ug jes
tion of its future duties, to one of the President's Se
cretaries ; and moved to lay the resolution, withtho
amendment,of» the table.
The Years and Nays being called fo;, on fh
question, stpo6— A yes #6 Non* 95.