Newspaper Page Text
strta’tton,it far outnytchita every other which! m'.iiath. > ,yn,'a «'< ■
has been mentioned. In the others, at least, I rent" powers tu' hot)
they attempted to point to the grant Of the to punish alt person
express power upon which they founded d'sniders, S.c. I( is i
ttlrir pile of incidents—in this, it was a (treed j <s .,’ . .f , llg j J|)( j.
:n hit*
of <'
constitution;.
that Ihere was no express power to whirl
the power exercised could he referred, ex
cept tlie creation of such a body aa Con
gress. We allude to the case oi' John An
derson. Into the propriety of giving to both
branches the exercise of the power claimed,
tve do not now enquire. We make war up
on usurpation only, whether expedient or
inexpedient.
Anderson made an attempt to bribe a to the exorcise of their sovereign power e
.member of the House, who gave information , in the formation of lluir constitution (HI
of it. He was arrested and brought to the , declare this transaction void, (his court steps
‘ uihority, and benevolently
you —f: the Lori l.'i'V :t <;m;
t that doTrust not to the "want
i whatsnefer l idly oi 1 .if titles, crow os Sr tubes—Usurpation is no
t'd rirulleciotr t in I u r barefaced when it cannot "iiniuand an
.'Supreme Court has I ovens helming physical force, but makes its
ever declared a hu* of Congress to lie on-J approach"! by more covert machinery.—
l*ul a re,',aids State In> At this very momeot.il is undermining the
tl’.ev have been swept away like dust, and
held up lie! i.x; the American people as quite
*• too feeble ioslrumei r to bind.” Should
the public domain of n state, by means the
most corrupt and fraudulent, lie bartered a-
way fur i sung by the public agents ; and
should the people of that state, aflei ward*
to the
bar of the House, when a question arose
to the constitutional power of the House to
punish him ? As we have said, it is must
glear that no such power is expressly enn-
'iferred to punish any others hut their oirn
members for disorderly conduct—nor is there
any clause to which it can be plausibly re
ferred as an incident? yet there was an n-
Terwhelming majority in favor of the power
to punish—and upon what principle would
the reader suppose? Why, an inherent one,
as it was called, resulting from the necessity
of the case. That ashy the constitution,
Congress was authorised to tnret in session,
■which could not be properly conducted
without the f>ou>er of self-preservation, as
well from disturbance as corruption, and as
bribing or attempting to bribe their mem
bers was totally subversive of their dignity
and integrity, therefore the House had a
jKHOtr inherent in it as a branch of the Nati
onal Legislature to punish such attempts.—
Whoever will consult the reasoning of the
Massachusetts Legislature in support of the
Sedition law, will find an astonishing simila
rity to that of the case, under consideration.
Here a new nest of powers has been disco
vered, not expressed, constructive, implied or
incidental, but inherent powers.(10) What
makes the ca«e more remarkable is, that
men of all principles and opinions seem In
have lost all regard for consistency in voting
upon it. Such an intermixture of incon
sisteocies, (if such a thing can he conceiv
ed) was scarcely ever witnessed.
We had intended at one time, to direct
public attention to another subject discussed
before Congress, somewhat connected by
analogy with those commented on, and on
which the doctrine of constructive and ne
cessary powers has been advocated to an ex
tent, dangerous not only to the rights of
these confederated stales, but to the essenti
al p'iac.iules of liberty. We allude to the
Seminolie war. liui lip.T, reflection,
we have concluded that the public mind in
vet too much heated upon that subject to
fisten to calm reasoningorexpos!uialion.(41)
If we have cause to bo alarmed for the
“ prospect before us,” on account of the
proceedings of the. Legislature, we have no
cause of congratulation from those of the
Judicial department. We have already
hinted, that we were aware of the r'nkujf os’-
tracism which we ran, in douhting the infal
libility i f the Legislature or the Executive.
The risk is by no means less in saying aught
against that of the inf sponsible Judiciary.—-
There is in this country an unfortunate dis
position to ascribe perfection to a man. the
moment he appears before the world in the
habiliments of a Judge. It would st-om that
a wig and a goivn have all the virtues of old
ascribed to the JEgis of Minerva. When
once assumed, they eradicate every vestige of
mental error, and those whom they cover
are regenerated, “disenthralled anil eman
cipated’’ from all the consequences of our
first parent’s sin and fall. Whatever may
have in>,:*n their characteristic defects before,
however loose in morals, or weak in mind,
they can “ sin no more.” A.caiost a saluta
ry independence in tho Judiciary, we. urge
nothing. It constitutes one of the safeguards
of human liberty. But its appearances are
as uncertain, and its direction as erratic as
those of a cufliut. Where is the country in
which the “ rights of man" have always
been protected by the Judiciary ? It is not
to be found. But ive can scarce turn our
eyes to the history of any nation, in which,
on the contrary, the Judicial department
has not become the agents of usurpation.—
We hope we shall not he accused of a dis
contented spirit in sa ving, that whatever our
own country may at one time have boasted
upon the subject, cjuise of boast no longer
exists. Unfortunately our constitution has j
invested the Executive magistrate with
the appointment of Judges—we say ap
pointment, because the Senate are ton de
pendent themselves upon Executive patron
age to exercise a wholesome check. Will
they make war upon their creators ? In
what nation did they ever do it ? And are
We to suppose that our Judges are more an
gelic in their natures than those of other
countries? What folly! In England the
tenure of the Judicial office is equally sta
ble as in this country—hut centuries have
pesoed since it attempted to stay the hand of
Executive usurpation. Its servile obedience
is at present a proveth. The Supreme Ex-
ecutive, under every form of government, is
that department which seeks to exercise dis
cretion, (dangerous in any.) and t« he un
shackled fimn restraint. Will it seek indi
viduals lor Judicial appointment, whose in-
dependeuec they may have cause to dread?
get* too, the gradations in the Judicial de
partment, before the. candidate can arrive at
the highest point of promotion. He is first a
district Attorney, then district Judge, ami
next a circuit Judge. II in all these lie has
well acquitted himself—if he ha? pronounced
nod fearlessly published long and learned n-
pitiions In favor of the sovereign powers of
the general government, and of the Execu
tive department in particular, his chance for
a seat upon the bench of the Supreme Court
is a good one. If elevated to that, his zeal
mustbe renewed to be selected before htarorn-
peers to the chair mode vacant by the death id
the crazy Chief Justice. Can he who has bold
ly 9 aid of the Executive, “ thus are yon re
strained,” and to the Legislature, “ thus far
can von go, and no farther,” and to the. Ju-
dieiiiry, “by this line are you circumscrib
ed and beyond it you cannot travel,” expert
to he chosen ? Never—In no country up
on earth is the apprenticeship more ardu
ous, or ini're requires a watchful conformity
to Executive will. Long, fang before the,
great boon is attained, the habits ofohtdt-
ence and the subordination of adjudications
will have been systematised and perfected.
Yet to the decisions of such a court, thus
trained and constituted, we are pointed as
rearing before Executive and Legislative
usurpation, the great bulwarks of security,
both to persons and property.
Before this tribunal, three of the great
• constitutional questions to which we have
adverted, have been brought. 1 he first was
the Sedition law.(4S) It was declared to he
constitutional. The second was the Bank
charter. Judgment was pronounced that
Congress not only had power to grant it.
«. .. ihe states were thereby robbed of a
in with
spreads the mantle of its sopiemaey over
tli" vilest principles of the human heart, to
-nii ld then) from punishment ami merited
hatred, and thus give to corruption a coloring
ul moral propriety, hy the agency "fa judici
al decision. Should a Stale in the exercise
ul an undoubted retained power, venture to
tax a capital of a certain description w ithin
its limits, the Supreme Court arrays against
it the sovereignty of the Union, declaring the
tax and the act imposing it void. But when
the power to he investigated, is that of the
f’Uited States, the ease is entirely different.
Then the language is, “ tho United States is
sovereign within its sphere,” and it is the es-
Henre of sovereignty “ to remove, every ob
struction to its own action”—then the fede
ral government, though limited in powers, is
unlimited in means—then “ an authority ac
knowledged to he granted either expressly,
or by implication to the federal government,
d, vests the states of whate ver would be de
structive and contradictory of it”—then,"the
application of an admitted authority of the
states is limited, in order to give full scope
and effect to an implied power of the Uni
on"—(4f>) then, it is a “ duty to construe tin*
constitutional powers of the national go-
vernuient liberally, and to mould (hem so as to
effectuate its great ohjee»s”(46)—then), “ the
minor ingredients,” (that is, constructive
powers.) “ which compose those objects” (of
the federal constitution) should l-e deduced
from Ihe nature o( the objects themselves, (,7)
and which objects, of course, are the “ com
mon defence and general welfare.” Then,
any law “ which is calculated to effect any
of the objects entrusted to the government”
is necessary and proper, and to “undertake
i,< tit': Supreme Court to enquire into the
degree of necessity would he to pass the
line which circumscribes the Judicial de
partment. 1 ”(48) Then, “ there is no phrase
in the constitution which excludes implied
-- Incidental powers,'”(49) although the con-
titulion dues i,'*'‘hat “ the pouters not dele-
fair fabric, of your liberties, under the gaih of
•‘necessity,’’ “implied powers,” « unlimit
ed means for limited powers,” “ the exercise
of u sound discretion for legitimate ends,"
•* sovereignty in a circumscribed sphere,"
and that “ practically, all government con
sists in little more than the exercise of a
sound discretion, applied to the exigencies oi
state as they arise, Stfc fee. Let these doc
trines cnnytitule the rules of practice, and in
what will your government differ from that
of England ? hut in the names of things r( 55)
They are the work tools of tyranny, the
scourges of the human race, the instruments
hy which sovereignty will he transferred from
the hands of the people, w here alone it is de
posited hy Ihe very nature of our institutions,
to those of our rulers, where it w as never in
tended to he placed. They are now appa
rently preached with unambitious humility
and professed reverence for the principles
of freedom. But Ifl them once obtain a
firm foothold—they will never lie mollified
hut with blood—never shaken but by revo
lution—ami until shaken, will make liiis go
vernment "work sorely on your nudes!'’—
They will cause your rights to “ lest only
upon the contingency of our rnlcis being
good or bad.” It is a fearful and prccurious
contingency, and will eventually hold up, if
not your selves, at leuat your jiosterily “ as
mournful proofs of the lost liberty ol your
country without the power of restoring it.”
The powers of the general government are
sufficiently fearful when tied down in their
exercise to the strict letter of the constituti
on. Acquiesce in their accumulation from
necessity and unlimited means, and implicati
on, and the construction of courts organized
by and dependent alone upon that govern
ment, and they will speedily get beyond thp
contiol of all constitutional limitation, and
unlimited discretion will commence her reign.
Doubtless there are many who have hi on
persuaded of the necessity of these mea
sures and principles, the dangerous tondrn-
ey of which, we have been endeavoring to
expose. But their honest convictions make
them not less dangerous. _ If power can lie
thus obtained by construction and implicoti-
on, w here was the necessity of providing a
way of amending the constitution ? None
whatever—Does die public good, the "ge
neral welfare and common defence” require
that more power should he given to the fe
deral government ? Let it be given by a
constitutional provision, but never—no, ne-
" restrict r.rs of tie’ mean* far executing ti.c
'“ powers bestowed. It bestows on Congress
“ die power of declaring war. But it restricts
“ On means of executing this power by limiting
“the rirht of taxation—by withholding tiie
“ right of ordering the militia without the U.
“Sliiles—hy withholding the right of imprei-
“ sing seamen or hind men—hy confining sp-
" piopri.itions for mi army to two years—and
“ hy excluding the government of the Union
“ from the nppointenent of militia officers. This
“ last power, positively restrred to ihe stale go-
“ verninents, is uvldently intended as a check
“ upon the power of the sicord, tiv dividing it
“ between the tw o governments—and a rotun-
“ Iter militia, officered hy the President or age-
“ nerat, is a liiesn, both convenient for the end
“ of war, and also for impairing or defeating tiic
“ end designed to be accomplished by me constilu-
“ lion. Is this inferred cunienirnce a fair ahro-
“ gallon ot the specified end ? Again, a lud-
“ den inroad, under the authority of the Preti-
“ dent into a country at peace with us, might lie
“ et beneficial and convenient mode of beginning
“ a weir, und a mean towards ultimate success—
“hut the right of involving us in tear is ezcht-
“ lively limited to Congress, fir cmls infinitely
“ more beneficial tu the nation. Ought these
“ more valuable ends to he sacrificed for the
“ sake of one less valuable?" Again, lie says,
“ w hen two nations are at war, a third may siib-
“ ject ilsell'to legitimate attack from either, hy
“ certain actions—yet even in this case, w hich
“ calls for a prompt decision, the constitution
“ pays no regard to the idea of h spherical sore-
“ rrignty," (in allusion to the idea advanced hy
the Supreina court in the Bank decision of the
suverieignly ol the federal government w illiin its
" sphere of action,) “ and disregarding the Inn-
“ gunge of the laws of nations, assigns the pow-
“ cr, ns in every other case where n declared-
“ on of war may lie necessary,to n department,
“ not as being sovereign, hut as lining a Iras'ee
“of tho sovereign power This trustc. alow
“ possesses a right to involve the I idled Stales
“ in ivur—mid no other department, nor any in-
“ dividual has a better eight to do su. than a ron-
“ stable has to bring Ihe same calamity upon F.ng-
“ land. As the laws of nations cannot deprive
“ Congress of any power will) w hich it Is In-
“ vested hy tho constitution, so they cannot in-
“ vest Congress or any other department with n-
“ iiv power not bestowed hy the constitution.'
The republican advocates of those persons who
involved the United Slates in tlie Seminolie war,
and especially that part of it which was waged
Hgninst Hie Spaniards, will find themselves pua-
jtleil to extricate themselves from the difficul
ties with w hich these two short extracts sur
round them, Hiol yet preserve their consistency.
The opinions of'every other man, however,
sink into nothing, when compared with those
of tlie p, event Chief Magistrate, on this subject.
Me has boldly declared, that in deciding upon
the conduct of the commanding general in that
war, he thou;' 1 ( me “ question of the. constitution
in no way involved," and therefore he did not
hesitate to approve it ! (sec his address to the
Tennessee volunteers.) Although it subjects
us to tlie humiliation of hogging the reader’s
pardon for our vulgarity, we cannot help ex
claiming “ llhew! this beats bob-tail!" Let it
not he forgotten, that in the Virginia Conven
tion Mr. Monroe, opposed the adoption of the
federal eontitulion, because he feared the abuse
but that the states were thereby
power of taxation upon its_eapital employed
within their limited) The third was the
cjs<f of John Anderson, to which tho deter-
although it wan heretofore believed that the.
federal government being one. ol limited pow
ers was intended to circumscribe, discretion,
which is the law of Kings—that •• the sci
ence of government,” " lias lint fern fixed
principles, and practically consists of little
more than the exercise of a sound discreti
on ’’(SO) Then, although it may tie true,
“ that, in power is given in the constitution”
upon a particular subjeef, yet of “ necessity,”
they uiii-t have it “ hv implication,” even if
there he no expressed power from which the
propriety °f the implied power is derivable ;
and although " tho. genius and spirit of our
constitutions are hostile to the exercise of
i m plied powers."( S11
The reader is invited solemnly to pause
over the principles 1 bus estaMi-hed and sup
ported by every department of tho federal
government, and calculate their tendency
and their consequences. If ho is a republi
can, according to the meaning attached to
that word in “ t'aia o’ lang syne”—if he be
lieves that liberty is best preserved liythe
preservation of the States in all their pow
er and uovercignty, exceptsuch part as was
surrendered for the nur|»oses of commerce
mil common defence—if he believes that the
general government should be strictly con
fined to the exorcise of its legitimate pow
ers thus surrendered only, I invoke him to
consider whether in these, fi similar claims
of power, lie does not behold the prostrati
on of every article of his political creed—
whether the Slates have left to them more
power than they used to confer upon a town
corporation—whether “ the respective so-
“ vereignties of the States, in the cases re-
“ served to them, are not superseded hy ex-
“ tending the sovereignty of the U. States to
“ nil cirses of the general welfare -that is to
“say, ‘ to all casts whatever, ’ thus silently
“and impelceptihly producing that great
“consolidated, government,” “the ohiious
“ tendency anil inevitable result” of which,
“ he once believed, “would he to transfer the
“ Iti'piihliean system of the United States in-
“ to a monarchy.”!&$) Whether from thus
extending federal powers hy construction,
two consequences, long since foretold, viz—
“ (he enlargenient of the sphere of Rxeeutive
patronage," and “ the excessive augmentati
on nf tiie offices, powers and emolument!)
depending on fJ.rtriifti'f will,''’ have tint al
ready followed—and if they have, whether
another foretold at the. same time, is not at
hand, to ivit-j-suoli an “ increase of preroga-
“ ( "c and patronage, a? must inevitably ei-
“ flier enable the Chief Magistrate of the C-
“ nion, by quiet means to secure his re-eledi-
“ on from nine to time, and finally to regu-
“ lutt ihe. succession as lie might please, or
“ hy giving mi transcendent an importance
“ to the office, as would render the elections
“ til it SO violent and corrupt, that the public
“ voice itself might call for au hereditary in
“ pi "e of an elective succession.” Whether,
as Patrick Henry said, the States have little
else to do, than to “take cate of the poor,
repair and make highways,(bflj erect bridges,
and so on, and so on.”
Let it not he said, that no one has yet as
sumed the title, or crown and sceptre of a
monarch. Does a title or a crown, or a
sceptre make a Ting? No—It is power
power'.! Do we not know of limited mo
il archies ? and lias surh an one no terrors ?
Orate we prepared lo say, “Nay, but we
“ will have a King over vs, that tve also may
“ he like all the nations—and that our King
“ may judge us, and go out before os mid
“ fight our battles?” Misguided people!—
Know you mA, that “ he will take your,ton.?,
“ and appoint them for himself, for his eba-
“ riots, and to lie his horsemen, and some
“ shall run before, his chariots.” “ Amt he
“ will take your daughters to be confection-
“ avies. and to he cooks, and to he linkers.—
“ And he will take your fields, and your o-
“ live yards, even the best of them, and give
“ them to his servants. And he will take
“ the tenth of your seed, and_ of your Vine-
“ yards, and give it to his officers, and to his
“ servants—And he will take your men ser-
“ vants, and your maid servants, and your
“ goodliest young men, and your asses, and
“ put them to his work—And lie will lake
« the tenth of your sheep, and yt shall be his
“ servants— Anil, ye shall cry out in that day
e because of your King, notch y ft shall hate
Suspicion is a virtue,” says Patrick hell- ot the powf. " couiened.
ry, “ as long ti3 its object is the preservation
of the public good, and as long as it stays
within proper limits.(fiC) Let your suspici
on look on hot!) sides.” “Guard with jealous
attention the public liberty—suspect every
one who approaches that jewel—Unfortu
nately nothing will preserve, it hot downright
force. It’hcnevcr you give up that force, you
are inevitably ruined!'' It i i high time that
the people of these states should enquire
whether all. or how much of that force has
been surrendered or usurped. It is high
time for those republicans, who are not curs
ed with office, (for is not that a curse which,
perverts principle ?) to enquire whether,
nut, the voids alone, hut the s/iirit and in
tention of the federal constitution have not
been violated. To the “conscript lathers”
of days that are past, we are. indebted Ibr
the tests by which the enquiry can lie made.
If they tire entitled to any consideration,
they leave not a doubt upon the question.—
There is not “a syllable,” says Alexander
Hamilton,(57) “ in the plan [of the c.misli-
“ lotion] which directly empowers the nei-
“ tinned courts to construe the laws accord-
“ nig to the spirit of the constitution, or
“ which gives limn any greater latitude in
“ this respect than may lie claimed hy the
“ courts of every state.” Wo can find them
however, from a more orthodox source.—
“ Unsolved,” say the Kentucky Resolutions
of 17hit, “ that the Severn] states composing
“ the United States of America, are not u-
“ nited on the principle of unlimited snhniis-
“ akin to their general government—hut that
“ hy compact under the style Ik, title of* coii-
“ stitiitiou for the U. States&ofamendments
“ thereto, they constituted a general govern-
“ ment for special purposes, delegated to
“that government ceitain definite po.,eis,
“ reserving, each State toilself. the residuary
“ mass of i ight to their own self-govcri'inent
“ —ami that whensoever tlie general gn-
“ vcrnnTcnt assumes nndehgtited powers, its
“acts are linnutliorilative, void, and of no
" force—That to this compact,each stale ac-
“ ceded as a slate, aqd is an integral party,
“ its co-states forming ns to itself, the other
“ party—that the government created hy
“ this compact was not made the exclusive or
“final judge of the extent of the powers de-
“ legated to itself—since that would have
“ made its discretion anil not the constiliiti-
“ on, the measure of its powers—hut that as
“ in all other cases of compact among par-
“ tics having no common judge, each party
“ lias an eqttal light, to judge for its 'If, as
“ well of infractions as nf the mcasuie of re-
“ dress.”(U«) These declarations, with mn
nynlhersofa similar kind, instruct us in th«
clear liieaulngof the federal constitution, and !
the intentions of the pawicS who •flamed it,
while at the same tune they point tu the true
rule of construction. Tliat ride is a strict
one. Whensoever it is departed from, en
croachments will increase
(42) Sec the casts ol .dultlicIF I” nn .> Ctdlcn-
dcr and others.
(4.)) After i ll that lias boon said about this
learned decision, all its reasoning has been com
pletely ovcr'diiown by two work*recently pub
lished, mid which we regret have not been
more read. One is the work of John Taylor,
of Caroline, Virginia,and the other, (lie Report
of the committee of of the Legislature of Ohio,
on the State’s right of taxation.
(44) The people of Georgia in the formation
if tlic-ir present constitution, made in 17yb, de-
hiredthe Yuzzo sale void and fraudulent. Hut
the Supreme court never regards state const)
lotions or laws. Their business Is lo establish
the sovereignly of tlie United States within its
sphere of action, which they have enlarged until
it i> unbounded. They supported the legal vali
dity of the basest transaction that ever disgrac
ed the records of astute.
(4o) We here quote from Walsh’s Missouri
pamphlet, pages 7£» and 81, in order that it
might at once he seen, to what dangerous ex
tent, powers will he claimed for the general go
vernment. nailer this (I had nearly said) accurs
ed Bank decision. Air, Walsh has made an in-
ferrence in these quotations, which is dearly
supported by the opinion ot the court. Tho
pamphlet Was written while powers were limit,
iug to Impose the restriction on Missouri. T his
Bunk decision gave them, or rather told holt
they could he implied According lo that de
cision, i know oi nothing, nut ulsolvicly yruhi-
irited, that the federal government cannot do
under the protection of some intphul power.
( Id) Mr. Rincknqv. (47) Bank decision
(4h) lb.— Vt luil then becomes of the citcck
in 1 ,.ncli'il to he held by Ibis department upon
tlie Legi.-lalnre t These principles support the
Sedition law, beyond nil doubt.
(40) Bank decision.
(■»uj Anderson s case —This is true of the
Supreme court. It is le.-s hound hj precedent
or f Tulprinciples than any other department of
the government, il it fixes u principle, it is ul
any time demolished, if il stands in the way of
federal power.
(dl) lids is clearly the principle, anil in part
Ihe i:ords of the decision in John Anderson's
case We have jjist peruse.!this ojirlist olpow
trs, and our feelings are pretty much of the ho
lme which we conceive Uncle Toby s to base
been, on hearing Ur. Slop pronounce sentence
of excommunication against Oucnn.li. Vie
could have extended il, hut by tlie time we ter
minated what we have written, ive entirely./er
got that we were whistling Liilebullero, when
we begun.
(82) We here, and subsequently quote from
Madison's Report, lo prole tliat Wliut lie fore
told i- daily happening.
(ml) Bui the Federal Government nre to do
this, and we have already seen Unit “ the ap
plication ol an admitted authority uftiie -dales
is limited, in order to give full scope to an impli
ed power of the Union — and the stales uru
“ eiivested of whatever would lie destructive or
contradictory"of federal authority, whether ex.-
* | press or hy implication.
(o4) These are Ihe words of the I-ring Cod,
by the mouth of Ills prophet, lie never speaks
in vain. Kings have been surli as are bene de-
,lr| bl 'isiirpntum j scribed, from tiie days of Saul to the present—
h.n completed it a'object, by the entire sub- | and they will never be miimvi.-e. To the peo
ple of every republic, the concluding sentence
is hii awful one! We slndl cry out, mid the
Lord will not bear v.s, because w e shall linve/ur-
knktn him, who now rules over vs, and served
other Gods How careful then should we he
not to permit the riUnt approuch of such a stale
of tilings, iiMImt the people shall sny "give tu
ii King to judge us," oi in the language of .Vtu-
lu.wint; short tu- | dison’s Report, “ call for an hereditary, in place
1 f an elective succession.” This was really
version oftlie authority of the state govern
merits, which constitute the only certain se
curities of the rights and the liberties of llie
people.— [To be continued j
BOTES.
HP) AVe might very well hr. " spared nnr-
selvc-i the (rouble of ihe comparison we haw
made, bad vve turned to (lie fn
hie made by John T aj lor, of Caroline, w hirl
does it in a much more concise manner, and [ the case with die Isr
yet shews the absurdity of the implied pow
ers claimed in a inuen more striking point of
-'lew
Powers etdimed
as means.
Incorporating Banks
Making roads.
Giving it aw ay..
Granting monopolies.
Prescribing state eftn-
slilutions.”
Construction construed, p. 215.
He might well have extended the list.
(4b) We presume it must have been from
this case that Mr. Ssrgeant borrowed the word
“ inherent," quoted before.
(41) Since writing our text, the following re
marks of John Taylor, of Caroline, imve struck
our attention. In writing them, to* could have
had an eye to no other subject—although they
are somewhat long, we think we sliuii be par
doned for their insertion. " Tlie constitution
“ of the Uefted Slates contains moiiy positive
,f opinion, to eilTeut its buds. Hie colonies tsd
“ inittrrl its supremacy in making tear ttndpinre,
“ mill in regulating commerce, but denied liiat
“ this Admission included a concession o
“ mean*, subversive of their own light of sell
“ government, ns lo which they claimed a su-
“ premnev for thennelvui. Tlie Parltuioenl
“ contended, that the right of making war, con-
“ ceded Ivy the colonies, implied a right of us
“ iug ail the meant necessary ful obtaining sue-
“ cess—such as raising n revenue, appointing
“ collectors, raising troops, quartering them
“ upon the colonies,and mnny other infarnn!
“ laws—Ami (hut tho right of regutating com-
“ merre, ol«n involved a rigid of imposing du-
“ ties and establishing custom-houses for their
“ collection, arguing that it w ould he absurd to
“ ait aw powers, and withhold any means twees-
“ snry or proper to carry them into execution.
“ The colonies replied, that it would be more
“ absurd to limit powers, and yet concede tm-
“ limited means for their execution, hy whioh
“ (lie internal supremacy upon which tlieir liher-
“ ty nud happiness depended, (hough nomiuul-
“ ly allowed, would tie elfeetually destroyed.
“ That Ihe terms “ sovereignty and supremacy,”
“ however applicable to the Parliament, were
“also applicable to the colonial governments
“ hi lo internal powers—tliat the necessity of
“ eontroling supreme, absolute, or sorartignpoiu-
“ cr in governments Imd been proved hy expe-
“ rience, particularly in England, w here magua
“ gliarta, the petition of right, and mnny de-
“ claratury law s had limited its means to a great
11 extent—ami that however tlie means contefid-
“ ed for by the Parliament might be useful for
“ carrying on war or regulating commerce, yet
“ that n restriction of these means, would be
“ still more useful, because it was necessary for
“ Ihe preservation of their liberties. The Parlia-
“ ment closed tlie debate by declaring that it
“ had a right to legislate over the colonies in
“ all casts whatsoever, and denying tlie distiac-
o turn between internal and external iegislati-
“ on, imposed some trifling tux of tlie. former
“ charucler, as ail entering wedge into the coin-
“ nial claim ol local supremacy, to be graduai-
“ ly driven up lo the head.”
Me bnve muile Ihe foregoing extract from
“ Construction Construed"fora double purpo-h.
1st, To shew what were tho principles at the
revolution, Unit it may appear upon what
grounds it is, that the republicans claim to tie
contending for these principles. 2d. To shew
that lire causes ot the revolutionary war, by simp
ly altering the terms Parliament and Cohnies,
and some allusions to tin: circumstances of the
day, is no other than the dispute which existed
in 17!'“ und 1 HOI, between the federalists and
republicans in relation lo fodeiut powers,
which dispute has continued and gained ground
iu favor oi those powers, to tlie present moment,
ninl in the self-same way that caused “mnny
of the best informed men in Mnssachuxctis" to
adopt “ tiie opinion oftlie Parliamentary right
ot internal government over the colonies, and
that tlie English statute book furnishes mni.y
instances of its exercise.” (See Marshall s Lite
of Washington, voi. 2, p. 71, 72.) Precedents
lire dangerous things, when founded in wrong
principles. They seldom io-e, hut commonly
gain strength. The Hunk question under tiie
present constitution was “ the entering wed go"
of federal powers. Next followed tile Sedition
law, Internal Improvements, invasions of the
State eight ol making its constitution, h-c. in
arriving at this point, is it not well to enquire
whether the Wedije is not “driven lip lo its
keftu ?” If u’ft cXiil)':'"’ hv Wittlt they have done,
into the extent of (lie powers of tin? federal go
vernment, tve slinl) find flint they lire as un
bounded us thosa^if Parliament. Expediency,
nut constitutional piuer, is the thing now en
quired into. Since the decision of tlie Supreme
court in tho Rank question, there is not a claim
tliat can arise, of the powers of Congress, to
which iis principles will not give sanction.
(fit*) Such of our renders ns are conversant
with the speeches of Patrick Henry, will doubt
less sec that vve hove been using his Innguage in
many passages, without particular referrences.
We could not adopt Ids ideas in better words
limn his own.
(57) In one oftho numbers of (lie Federalist.
(oB) The Kentucky resolutions nre said to be,
Ai no doublure the production of Mr. Jefferson.
They are in perfect unison will) those of Virgi
nia, saiil to lie written hy Mr. Madison, 't he
opinions of these two men must be considered
ns pow erful authority, delivered under the cir
cumstances that they were. We ngain remind
the render that in our remarks wo are prescrib
ing no new rules of construction, or new prin
ciple-—Inn that we merely intend to revive old
mid approved ones, and to shew that (hole who
built them up have dcinufisluid them.
Commerce, Revenue, Manufactures.
We lenrii that the commerce and re
venue of tiie United States are visibly
improving. As a prcofol'tliis statement,
we have been informed that the reve
nue bonds taken in the present quarter
ul the custom-house iri Neiv-York, a*
mount to upwards of a half million of dol
lars rtjore than those taken in the same
port during thd corresponding quarter of
lust year. Though the improvement
tnay not Imve been proportionably greht
m every other seaport, it has in the ag
gregate Iu.cn considerable. While this
is the fact with regard to otjr commerce
tun) revenue, it is manifest to the close
observer, that our manufacturing estab
lishments, especially in Hie eastern states,
tire also gradually becoming more pro
fitable. We often meet with paragraphs
m the newspapers tending to produce
this impression, which receives confir
mation in the verbal intelligence derived
from persons attentive to the subject.--
These statements, if correct, find we be
lieve they are, establish tho position, if
it needed any new demonstration, that
the prosperity of foteign commerce and
that of domestic manufactures are not in
compatible ; and the improvement which
is natural and gradual in these interests
certainly'ptonnses to be the most sub
stantial ami permanently valuable to a
nation.—I'rvnklin Gazette.
CxHawbA, June 33.
The Legislature of this State adjourned
sine die on Monday last without doing much
business of importance. At all events the
object for which the (federal Assembly was
convened has not been attained—iu> appur
tionrnent was made.
THEATRE.
T ITF. public, are respectfully inform«J, (fail
the Company have engaged Mr. l>A.tve a
service for (be present and ensuiug week Wy»
when the season ends.
On this Evening, July 10,
¥ov Miss darlt’ft
Will he presented, Mrs. Inchbald'a* much ad
mired Comedy in five acta, of
WWES as t\w* WEB.T&,
AND
AVAlliS as AM.
The EPILOGUE to be spoken hy Mis* CLARK*
AFTKK WHICH, A BALLET CALLB0
Little Red Riding-Hood,
With Dancidfc, be. be.
Mr. SCHINOTTFS BENEFIT on Thurtdsf
evening.
Indian Spoliations.
T IIE SUBSCKIREBS will underlake as A-
gents and Counsellors, the settlemvnt of
all claim} for Indian Spoliations, referable to
the United States Commissioner, under tbe*r
several treaties with the Creek Nation.
CRAWFOKD b LAMAR.
Millederville. July H. 22—3w.
TUe SALE ot LIVL&S
ADVERTISED by the Subecrihrr, it*
postponed to Friday tne 31st of AUCU. ST
—until that time, Drugs, £i.c. will he si “i ie«
ry low for cash. T. BIRD.
July 10. 22—tf.
Seiect .Ma»iot s AU ond \
rjMIE Jerusalem Couucil of f Mas
ters will assemble at th. H
pie Chapter, THIS EVEN
clock. By com maw. , ihe
July in.
tu.
stop,
“ Powers bestowed
by Congress.
o Taxation
“ U ar
“ jljfirnprinting money
“ It' (totaling trade
“ Admitting new slates
lites, their judges liavin
disregarded the Ians, “and turned aside after
Ui( re, and took bribes, and pen-tried judgment."
hoeirncrs U governments will ever do il, unless
closely wrtclied brought back hy the effectual
chastisements of public suspicion, ami public
indignation. Unbounded confidence in "rulers
willevcr be betrayed. The people of Israel had
as little reason to believe tliat their judges, the
sous of Samuel, would “ forsake his Ways” qs
we have to suspect our present rulers—yet, they
“ turned aside after lucre, took bribes, amiper-
rerted judgment." Give ours the “unlimited
means" and depend upon il they u itldo the same
tiling, however much you may limit their poio-
(55) We think we shall be readily pardoned
for introducing the following extract. “ Pre-
“ v.ouJyU' our revolutionary war, the colonies
“ liadfleen thoroughly lectured upon the sub-
“ sovereignty, supremacy and a division
“ uijflouers. The Kiigthli Parliament couteud-
“ eil that its sovereignty or supremacy included
“ u'.l means neccssury or convenient, in its own
T\YL YOST-MTF1LL
AND THE
SUBSCRIBER'S STORE
ARE removed to the corner of Wayne
and Hancock streets, in the building former
ly occupied by Mr. Rosseter.
THOMAS* M. BRADFORD.
July 10. 22—tf.
A LUST Oi 1 l.E i i i.i'.ti
Remaining in the Post O re- -t Ji .r
Jackson county, on the fir:.
If not taken out by ; t dr,
her next, will bo :•«! rn-d ■■.l 1,
A Stephen Js
Cornelius Atkimon,
James Armer,
Stephen Arnold.
B
Capt. E. Bothwcl),
Jesse Bennett,
Middleton Brooks,
Samuel Bailey,
William Bennett,
Lewellen Barker,
John Brown,
John Bradford,
Jacob Boston,
Drayton Blake,
Robert Barnwell,
Peter Brooks,
Thomas Bradley,
Catharine Purgen.
Jonathan C. Coker,
James Callahan),
Alexander Cavin,
John Cox,
Cl’k Jackson court,
John Collins, 2,
Tnpley Camp,
Mrs. Mary Collins,
VViley Creslcr,
Alexander Cresler,
Joseph Chandler,
Parks Collins,
Abner Camp,
William Cowah,
James Collins,
Abraham Ciardy, 3,
John Clark,
Hosea Camp,
John Cate,
Andrew Collins,
Samuel Chapman.
D
Charies Durherty, *,
Alls. Mary Doherty,
Hugh Dickson,
J. C. Depreest, 3,
Amos Dowdy,
William Dobbs,
Henry Dawson,
Louis J. Dupree,
E .
Anthony Elton,
John R. Eskridge,
Samuel H. Everett^
Christopher Ellis.
F
Benjamin Frecmah,
Samuel Fer,
Chandler Flagg.
U
Moses Gresham, 2,
Miss Mary J. Griggs,
Roger Green,
Edmond Gresham,
Rev. David Garrison,
H
Joseph Hampton, 3,
Miss Louisa Hudson,
Perineous Il.iynes,
Messrs. E. Adams, bt
John Hardwick,
C.ipt. J. Hammons,
V. Darien,
Early Hurrisi
Rev. John Mormon,
Littleton Hunt,
William Heard,
Samuel B. Hill,
William Hewett, 2,
Richard Hutcherson,
Doct. James Henry,
James Hoopaw,
Charles H. Hardy,
Elias Henderson,
Louis tlppguod,
Thomas Hanson,
William Harper,
Prosser Horton,
Arch’d Ilanibletot),
E. Hogan,
George Hawpe,
Samuel Hay,
William Ilutsoh,
I
Mrs. Sophia Jones,
THOMAS liVDE, P. JIT.
July 2. *2—3t
Administrator's Sale.
W ILL BE SOLD at the store of Ste
phen Pearson, in Hancock county, at
Fairpiay, On Saturday, the 29th August
next, ALL THE PERISHABLE PRO
PERTY of Angus Chisholm, dec'd, consist,
ing of wearing apparel and a few other arti
clcs. Terms made known «n tlie day.
DUPLEY LAWSON, AdmV
M—tds,
ties,
Lc
Mis* ‘ nrahJc
John Inzer,
John Jones.
K
James Krlluham,
Waller Key.
Ge-ii’ge Lester,
John Lane*,
William Lowry,
Thomas Lenoir,
James R, Lowry,
Deimus Lell,
Robert Lane,
William Luckless*
George Luck,
Pierce B. Louis.
M
Arch’d McDonald,
Jhs.H. McCluskcy,®,
J JVI C Montgomery,*!
John Madden,
Joseph M. Cluster,
William Morres,
Thomas Morres,
Joseph Marbrey,
Levi Morell, 3,
Charles Mannor, $,
Seaborn Maddox,
Charles McKinney*
Andraw Millican,
John D. Martin,
Jesse Mougthon,
Willis Mooie,
William D. Martin*
Samuel Marjin,
Peter Martin,
Jacob. Mills* ps,
Bradoek McDonald,
Wilson McKinney,
Elisabeth Murpfliy,
N
Joseph Norman,
William Nox.
O
S olly Overcast,^
eps Osborn.
Charles Pr'ftei
James Patterson*
John Pratchett.
Miss Allice Pt*rle,
John Parka,
ZachariaKPetty,
Ransom Paiham.
R *
Alexander Reed,
Johh Rogers, 2,
Jo' ri Randolph, 2,
Peytcn Randolph,
John Redlt^.,
Sion Kenuiugjon,
Willis Rowland,
S
Fleming Staton,
Matthew Spears,
Green Sleed,
William Stewart,
George Shields,
John W. Simmons*
Hiram Svrugiugs,
Houthiotl Scgrist,
Robert Smith wick.
T
Richard Tileet.ing,
William Thompson,
Penelope Tliorqtun,
Mark Thornton,
Allen Thomas,
Capt. H.ThotoM*
Edmond Taj lot-,
GranvilleThompson,
Y
Joseph Yarborough.
W
Timothy C.“Woods,
John VViille,
Miss R. Wilkiys,
John Wbigbam,
Isom Williams,
Robert C. Wingfield,
Miss Polly Ward.
KANAWAY
F ROM the subscriber&n
the night of the 7th
instant, a negro man slava
named
SAM.
He U about 23 yean of arge, black completi
on, about 6 feet i) or 10 inches In height, jvelt
made, lias rings iq his ears, wore away with
him a Gingham Coatee, while par,taloo«i», a
half-worn Beaver hat, with the subeortber'a
name in the lining—-took with him a bridle,
and perhaps wtl! pretend he fs looking for*
horse. A reasonable reward, mad ull
bie expense* will be paid for hi*
and delivery.
SAMUEL, ROC
Milledgeville, July 10.
.#*