« AnteriorContinuar »
this, in the action of this government, be interested are deprived of the aid of the regarded in any other light than as General Government in necessary improvedestroying all claim to confidence in any ments of a river for navigation, they would proposition that shall lead to it? We trust clearly be entitled to levy duties upon vesour system is not quite so weak, puerile sels coming from other States, in order to and, we may add, unworthy, as the truth of supply the means of making such improvesuch a proposition would presuppose it. ments themselves. This power of levying In our judgment, the point is worthy of duties, in the case supposed, is manifestly serious discussion, only in consideration of sustained by the just principle of compenthe source from which it comes.
sation; for, as other States have the adWe here close what we designed to offer vantage of a navigation, made practicable upon the two paragraphs of the Report, and useful by the sole means of the two whether singly or together ; but before States, they are, in equity, bound to conleaving the second general proposition tribute in the only way they can, to reimwhich we undertook to discuss, and upon burse those two States the expenditures to which the two paragraphs referred to have which they have been subjected for the so material a bearing, we shall offer a few general accommodation. Now is Mr. Calgeneral reasons why, in our judgment, that houn prepared for a consequence like this, of proposition cannot be sustained.
the doctrine of his Report? We apprehend First. It is, to our mind, a most serious not. Nevertheless, we see not how he can objection to the doctrine of the Report, escape it, unless by assuming the Constithat it is of indefinite application as to the tution to be a mere convenience, to suit subjects of it. It will be observed that particular occasions, such as caprice may the Report specifically applies the opera- select, or a miserable jumble of contradiction of the clause, “No State shall, without tions, denying the uniform and equal justhe consent of Congress, enter into any tice which it professes to secure. agreement or compact with another," only Second. In connection with the objecto the power of Congress “to regulate tion just offered, and without the advancommerce.” Now are there not other tage of the exception suggested in it, in provisions of the Constitution to which favor of the power of two States, in the that operation may be applied with just as case supposed, to levy duties, &c., it may much propriety as to this? We maintain be urged as a conclusive and overwhelmthat there are; and in this, we are borne ing argument against the proposition of out by the Report itself, when it declares the Report, that its operation would work that there are " various subjects in which the most monstrous injustice upon the the several States are mutually interested States to which its principle would attach. in adjusting and regulating,” which come Two States, for instance, as New-York and within its doctrine. Now there are, at New-Jersey, border upon the same river. least, a dozen of these “various subjects" This river is open to the commercial enterwhich might be mentioned, in entire con- prise of all the other States; thousands of sistency with the reasoning and admission the inhabitants of the latter States trace of the Report, and coming within the doc- their fortunes to the navigation of it; the trine ; but we shall name only one. How, nation at large, by universal consent, derive then, for instance, stands the clause, that annually millions of profit from it; and “ vessels bound to or from one State, shall yet the two States, at an enormous annual not be obliged to enter, clear or pay duties expense, and by a standing compact, (Conin another?” To our mind, the applica- gress kindly consenting to it) must keep tion of the principle in question to this such river in order! the common national clause, forming an exception to it, would purse giving back nothing of the enormous be just as legitimate, as it is to the clause gains thus constitutionally realized by the giving to Congress the general power to whole confederacy, from the constitutional regulate commerce: nay, even more so; plunder of a parl! And more and worse for there is a reason of high justice for its than all this : when the two States implore application in the former case, if it be ap- of the nation relief from such a load of inplicable in the latter, in the fact, that as, justice, they are insultingly told that, to by its latter application, the two States relieve them, would be to interfere with
their State rights! They have exclusive the reasoning of the Report, founded on control of the river; and any interfer- the “ treaty, alliance and confederation" ence of Congress to remove obstructions clause, must fall to the ground. But the from it, for the general good, would be an reasoning of the Report, upon the matter outrage upon their proper State dignity under consideration, consciously or unconand honor. We have heard much of sciously to its author, presupposes that State rights, and of nullification to vindi- clause, as is shown above; and therefore, cate them. The Report introduces us to a for all the purposes of this argument, the new category-State wrongs; but says clause " to regulate commerce ” must be nothing of nullification to redress them! considered as inapplicable. And hence, as
A third objection is, that the proposi- without the “ treaty, alliance and confedtion of the Report, ascribing the control of eration" clause, three or more States Congress over rivers bordered by three might make a compact, and as it is, ácStates to the power to regulate commerce, cording to the Report, because two States cannot stand consistently with the propo- may make a compact under the “agreesition under consideration.
ment and compact” clause, that Congress It will be observed that the whole force is denied the power over rivers confined of the argument of the Report, for the dis- to such two States; it follows, that, in the crimination which it sets up between three absence of the "treaty, alliance and conStates and two, in regard to the power of federation" clause, (three States being, in Congress over rivers, turns upon the as- such case, enabled to make a compact) sumption that two States may make a the power of Congress over rivers borcompact, but that three or more cannot. dered by such other States, must be denied It follows, hence, that if three or more also—the clause “to regulate commerce States could make a compact, their case in notwithstanding. regard to the power in question would Now, this reasoning, to make the Report stand
upon the same ground that the case consistent, requires that it shall abandon of two does; and, as the Report excludes either its proposition that the power of the latter from the power, it must necessa- Congress over rivers running in three rily exclude the former also. Now if the States or more, comes from the clause “to “treaty, alliance and confederation" clause regulate commerce," or the proposition were not in the Constitution, it is admitted under discussion—which claims that that that three or more States might make a power does not extend to cases of rivers compact, as well as two; and that, hence, running in only two States. Which of the in such case, the power in question two propositions the Report shall abandon, would be no more applicable to the case
remains for itself to say. Our purpose of rivers in three or more States, than to alone is to prove, that its adherence to the that of rivers confined to two. Now, the first proposition is a conclusive objection necessary effect of this view is, to make to the tenableness of the last. the power ascribed to Congress over rivers A fourth objection to the proposition bordered by three or more States, to under consideration is, that it assumes a come, in point of fact, from the “ treaty, reading of the “ agreement and compact alliance and confederation" clause. But clause, which is not borne out by the good the Report, in terms, ascribes the power to sense of the case, or by acknowledged the clause giving to Congress the power rules of legal interpretation. This reading “ to regulate commerce among the States." limits the application of the clause to two Now, it is quite clear that the power can- States only, where there is every reason not come from both of these clauses ; for applying it to all of them. When it much less, sometimes from the one, and is said that “No State shall, without the sometimes from the other, as may suit the consent of Congress, enter into agreements convenience of some present purpose. It or compacts with another," we understand must come certainly, definitely, and under the meaning to be, that the States, generall relations, from only one of them, if it | ally, are prohibited from making agreecomes from either. Now this power ments with each other, in any number, comes from the clause "to regulate com- whether two or ten, without the consent merce," or it does not. If it does, then of Congress. This view, we say, is clearly
sustained by the obvious reasons for the conclusive argument against the existence insertion of the clause, as already explain- of a power, that it is not exercised; espeed; these reasons being just as applicable cially in a case like this, where the necessity to any other number of States as to two. of its exercise, in the infant growth of a It is as clearly borne out by acknowledged continent of States, must be so infrequent rules of legal interpretation ; for should a compared with the whole extent of counlaw declare that “no man shall do this or try, as to make no distinct impression that thing," without a certain penalty, every when it occurred. The States, then, we lawyer must say, that it is not one man hold, must have possessed the power to merely that is embraced in the provision, build commercial harbors at the period of but every combination of men, no matter the adoption of the Constitution; and being what the number who might, by violating so possessed by them, it must, according to such provision, come within its bearing the admission of the Report, have passed The clause in question, we maintain, stands over to the present national government, on the same ground,
under the power “to regulate commerce. We proceed now to the third proposition The second argument of the Report of the Report which we proposed to con- against the power of Congress to build sider, viz. : That the power “ to regulate harbors for commerce, viz., that they commerce " cannot be exercised in the must necessarily be located within the construction of harbors for commerce, but limits of individual States, and therefore only those for shelter.
be controlled by them, has already been Three arguments are urged by the Re- answered in what we have said in relation to port in support of this proposition : First, the regulation of commerce within the that the States, in the exercise of the limits of a single State. A harbor must power of regulating commerce, never ex- have a locality within a single State, or tended it to the improvement or constrnc- nowhere. And to say that because it is tion of harbors for commerce-neither sub- so, therefore it is not a proper subject of sequent to, nor before the Revolution, while congressional legislation, is simply to beg colonies. This, if true, is an extraordinary the question; and there we leave it. fact; but the inference drawn from it is The third argument, viz., that the more extraordinary still. No one will be Constitution discriminates between the so absurd as to say, that harbors are not powers of a State to levy duties on imindispensable to commerce. The question ports and exports on the one hand, and on then is, who shall build them? Undoubt-tonnage on the other, giving the net proedly the public, through its proper gov- ceeds of the first to the national treasury, ernment. You cannot expect individuals and reserving those of the last to the to do it, it being“ beyond their means.” treasury of the State, appears to me to be Each of the States, then, certainly after founded in perfectly arbitrary conjecture, the commencement of the Revolution, and sustained neither by the history of the before the adoption of the Constitution, government, nor the reason of the thing. must have had the power to build them; There are a hundred purposes to which a and if they did not exercise the power, it tonnage duty might be applied with equal was not because they did not possess it, propriety as to that of building harbors ; but because they had no occasion to use and it is worthy of a moment's thought, it. They probably had harbors enough that harbors must be built before the duty already, and which had grown at differ- can be levied; so that the question stands ent points on the Atlantic coast so grad - open for discussion before the fact can ually, as that their growth was not partic- exist upon which the argument is predicaularly observed, and made no mark in the ted. Why it should be assumed and history of the times. There certainly asserted as a fact that the tonnage duty were harbors then as there are now; and which might be levied by a State, was they were built by somebody; and to say intended for the single purpose of building that the particular State governments did harbors, and for no other, we cannot comnot build them, is to say what all rational prehend; and before we will believe the probabilities pronounce to be untrue. But, fact, we demand the proof; and until this at any rate, it is no necessary, or at least, comes, we shall regard the assertion of it as
another begging of a question. But, fur- bating club of very young men, but, in our ther, it must be borne in mind, that “the judgment, is utterly unworthy a moment's consent of Congress " must precede this attention of a practical statesman. levying of a tonnage duty by a State ; We here conclude a discussion--already too: and as this consent may be refused, the ar- long protracted—which we regret has not gument in hand is liable to the objection fallen to abler hands. There are those who already urged against the argument de- think the Report which we have examined, duced, for another purpose, from the refutes itself, and therefore requires no power of two States to make a compact, elaborate criticism to expose its errors. to which the same contingency is attached. This may or may not be just. Whether
The distinction between a harbor for so or not, however, there is a power about commerce and a harbor for shelter, is, to | Mr. Calhoun's name and position, which our apprehension, utterly without meaning, would make it worse than in bad taste, to The only possible difference between the regard any state paper slightingly that two, that we can see, is, between a vessel's comes from his pen. He is, without doubt, lying at a wharf to take in lading for a one of the master minds of this country voyage, and her lying at the same place to and age; and thousands take their law wait the passing of a storm. There is a implicitly from his opinions, however extrarwharf in either case, and it serves both agant in themselves, or feeble in the argupurposes equally well ; and why we should ment that would sustain them. It is to not be permitted to call that a “ facility" such, that we would especially address what to commerce which gives the conven- we have said, in the hope, that though we ience of shipping the freight that is the may not succeed in producing conviction, substance of it, as well as that which pro- we shall not entirely fail to awaken thought. tects from the winds the vessel in which
W. G. such freight is shipped, may be a curious Cincinnati, Dec., 1847. question for the wits of a metaphysical de
THE ANGLO-SAXON RACE.
AN INQUIRY INTO
THE CAUSES OF ITS UNRIVALLED PROGRESS, WITH SOME CONSIDER
ATIONS INDICATIVE OF ITS FUTURE DESTINY.
The present age is developing, with understanding and appreciation of their lastartling rapidity, the national characteris- bors and wants—to seize some prominent tics of races which must ultimately be sub- traits of social excellence early exhibited, ordinated to one. Inquiry has recently re- and trace them through all the vicissitudes ceived a new impulse, and the future com- of time down to our own age. plexion of society is rousing the attention It is wise, at times, to fathom the mysof the statesman, the philosopher and tic future; to scan the coming age, and scholar. Whatever results may spring from sketch its characteristics and destinies, their investigations, it is obvious that, even through the light of the present. And now, the means of stimulating and direct- though the veil which conceals its imprint ing successful inquiry are neither few nor be closed to our view by an all-wise Provsparsely distributed. On the other side idence, yet nature instinctively urges us to of the Atlantic societies have been formed, trace the influence of the present on the and volumes published, * for our information future history of our descendants. It is as to the long-neglected literature of “ our the closing prayer of the patriot to his sucnoble ancestors ;” and we propose to fur- cessors, remember the deeds of your fathers, nish some brief indicia to a more intimate and by them receive guidance for the future.
When man first issued forth from Ba* Among others, Palgrave's and Allen's, (noticed in Warren's Law Studies, pp. 161, 162, 163.)
bel's plain, his domains were assigned him.
Each form where blend the lily and the “Our first authentic accounts of Eng. rose was fixed in a cool and fertile clime.* land, are at the landing of Cæsar, nearly Each frame whose swarthy hue distin- two thousand years ago."
The merest guished its possessor from his “fellow school-boy is familiar with the pages of the dust," departed for the torrid vales of Af- author-warrior, and we need not dilate rica. Yet, age after age and convulsion upon the character and spirit of the ancient after convulsion have passed, and the for- Britons. Yet we cannot pass over the mer have retained the most of their primitive Druids-whose name generally awakens excellence wherever fate may have cast vague conceptions of barbaric priests their lot. And now the European sweats chaunting their hymns to some bloody under Congo's sultry sky, or shivers be- deity in the recesses of the forest, and, neath the polar blast. The Englishman amid the over-hanging rocks, invoking his and American of the nineteenth century protection, or soliciting his favor by the meet amid the palmy groves of Ceylon, sacrifice of human victims. Perhaps our or the coral isles of the Pacific, and minds will start at the idea, that they were hail each other brother. Over“ the the political soul and guides of their sevsteppes” of Central Asia, or through the eral tibes, the life-blood of civil liberty, forests of the wild New-Hollander, they the unswerving champions of their people shout the watchword, Onward, onward. against the tyranny of the Romans; and
There must be some elements which fur- yet such may have been the case—if we nish the key to such a vast superiority over believe Cæsar and Tacitus, such was the their fellows; as we shall carefully estab- case.* The stern, mysterious rites of the lish hereafter. These will meet us—they Druids—with all their folly-reveal a have forced themselves upon the notice of spirit of religious activity only too widely every other race ; and we shall consider stimulated. The direction of the current these characteristics somewhat more in de- was right, but its impetuosity engendered tail. It is (among other causes, less obvi- the most terrible outrages. Then all Engous, though, perhaps, not less important) land was a living representation of that to their moral integrity, their ceaseless en vast
, intangible and darkly impressive idea, terprise, (their roving habits stimulated by a God-whose attributes corresponded to natural inquisitiveness, and improved by their own rude, mysterious feelings. Each their advantages,) their intellectual aclivi- plain was redolent with sacrifices—was ly, and, lastly, to the social elevation of vocal with the Druids' nightly reverence women, we assign this pre-eminence. ascending to Him. Such ideas and expec
1. At present it might appear as singu- tations derived a 'thrilling impressiveness lar as it will be found true, that the Anglo- from their mighty, dark, and solemn forSaxon race has ever been distinguished estst—their ceremonies performed during from all others, by moral elevation, by re- the hours sacred to repose, in the solemn ligious fervor. How much of this should be shades of night, combined with the conattributed to a direct interposition of the stant presence of His ministers among the Deity in their behalf,f and how much, on people. To them the intercourse of their the other hand, belongs to their own silent hoary priests seemed like a near approach efforts, we need not determine. But if from heaven, too dread and too sublimely an attentive view be cast upon them in real to be neglected. Whatever we may their earliest and most simple “ strivings" think of them as Christians, we cannot reafter the sublime idea of a God, in their fuse the meed of praise to such pure-minded more remote endeavors to grasp that of though heathen patriots. We can well " the Increate," not dimly seen by them in sympathize with the heroic devotion of His works—a hope would arise that such the Druids ; for the religious teachers of an investigation may be amply repaid. our ancestors could “fight” as well as
*To this fact Humbolde ascribes the superiority preach : they cherished a wild, patriotic of the inhabitants of temperate climes over all other.. (Am. Review, June, 1816, p. 600). “Though the desire and feeling
be common to all, they alone Tac. Annal., Lib. xiv. sec. Xxx. (Murphy, p. 257, are able to satisfy it."
note.) Hist. Lib. iv. sec. liv. Cæsar, De Bel. Something strongly confirmative of this conjec- Gal. passim. ture may be found in Ward's 'Lectures on Ancient Is- De Mor. Ger., ix, (Murphy, n. 5,) xliii., n. Agrael,'noticed in The Anglo-American,'Jan.24,1846. I ricola, xxvii. (n. 9.)