Whole No. 40G.
Tarborough, (Edgecombe County, JV. C.) Tuesday, June 12, 1833.
Vol. VIII -Wo 48.
The "North-Carolina Free Press,"
BY GEORGE HOWARD,
Is published weekly, at Two Dollars
and Fifty Cents per year, if paid in ad
vanceor, Three Dollars, the expira
tion of the year. For any period les,?
than a year, Tivcnty-five Cents per
month. Subscribers are at liberty to dis
continue at any- time, on giving notice
thereof and paying arrears those resi
ding at a distance must invariably pay in
advance, or give a responsible reference
in this vicinity.
Advertisements.not exceeding 16 lines
will be inserted at 50 cents the first in
sertion, and 25 cents each continuance.
Longer ones at that rate for every 16
lines. Advertisements must be marked
the number of insertions required, or
they will be continued until otherwise
ordered. J7"Letters addressed to the
Editor must be post paid, or they may
not be attended to.
CONGRESS.
Internal Improvements.
The bill approprialing about a
million anda quarter of dollars
for purposes of internal im
provements, was taken up in
the House of Representatives
on the 19th ult. When the bill
was about to have its third read
ing an incidental debate arose
for a few minutes, on a question
to reconsider the vote, ordering
it to be engrossed and read a
third time, the motion for re
consideration being rejected,
the question upon the passage
of the bill coming up
Mr. T. H. HALL said, the debate
which had just occurred was to him
wholly unlooked for. It had been
customary, at this stage of bills, not to
discuss the details or principles, that
having usually been done previously.
It was, however, his purpose to give
his views generally, on this subject,
both as to its details and principles.
But before he entered into Ihs sub
ject, he would take occasion to say
that he had voted acainst reconsider
ation because he believed, and under
stood, that the object was to draw a
distinction between some of the items,
with a view of striking out a part of
them. He objected to this course,
because he viewed all the various por
tions of the bill, so far as principle
was concerned, as standing precisely
upon the same footing. If one part
was constitutional, they were all so
and he wished that no invidious dis
tinclions should be made. He was
not one of those who believed a mea
sure was either constitutional or ex
pedient merely because it went into
the Mate or District to which he be
longed, while a measure, of exactly
the same nature elsewhere, was nei
ther constitutional or expedient. It
will be recollected, that when the de
tails of this bill were under consider
ation, I took some part in the debate,
but confined my remarks only to one
or two items of appropriation for N.
Carolina, I did so, because I was bet
ter acquainted with them than with
most others, and also, because, after
opposing those in my own immediate
vicinity, which I felt it my duty to
do, I could, with more propriety, and
with cleaner hands, oppose others of
similar character elsewhere. Mr.
Speaker, no one can suppose that, I
can be unfriendly to the commercial
prosperity of North Carolina, far from
it this surely is not the cause of my
opposition to appropriations for im
provements of this character, but I
oppose them for the reason, that I not
only do not feel myself at liberty, be
cause. I think Congress has not con
stitutional authority, but because I be
lieve they must ultimately fail in pro
ducing any substantial benefit. The
item of appropriation for the Swash
was not, as seemed to have been sup
posed, the only one to which I had
objections. In principle I am equal
ly opposed to that for clearing away
obstructions below Wilmington, and
unless the efforts of Congress are at
tended with better success than those
made by the State authorities, it is not
likely they will be very beneficial, for
1 have understood, from respectable
authority, that so far from the appli
cations made by the State authorities,
Jiaving been very beneficial, it was
believed, that they had rather done
injury certainly no great good. As
to improvements of a similar charac
ter with those of North Carolina,
(and the greater part of the bill con
sists of appropriations for similar pur-
puses,; me remarks ol the Engineer's
eport which I read on a fn rmpr nr.
casion, will apply to them generally,
and if it meets with the approbation
of the House, 1 will again read the
part of the Report to which I allude.
nere Mr. 11. read what annears n
an abstract from a report of Capt.
uacne, already given.J And Sir, to
sustain me in the description Which I
gave of the obstructions to the navi
gation of North Carolina, I will read
the following, "In the history of
North Carolina, by John Lawson,
Surveyor-General of North Carolina,''
Ltondon, 1709, we have f nacre Gil a
general description of the coast, in
the following words:
"This part of North Carol ina is fnrpft
with a chain of sand banks, which defend
it trom the violence and insults of the
Atlantic ocean: by which barrier a vast
Sound is hemmed in, which fronts the
mouths of the navigable and pleasant riv
ers of this fertile country, and into which
tU.. .1 : 1 1 n-..
uityuisigc uiemscives. l iirougti the
same are inlets of several depths'of wa
ter. Some of their channels admit onlv
of sloops, brigantines, smalt barks and
hetcnes; and such are Currituck, Roan
oke, and up the Sound above Hatteras;
whilst others can receive ships of burden,
as ucracocK, l opsail Inlet and Cape
rear, as appears oy roy chart."
I believe it is wll nnrlr
since this period both Roanoke and
Lurntuck Inlets have been rendered
useless by being filled up with sand.
.Mr. Speaker, while I, in common
With mV Colleagues, and with rmr
constituents generally, lament the ex
istence ot these, as 1 think, irremedia
ble obstructions to our commerce, vet
I am somewhat consoled, that in this
as in almost all other cases, there is
not to be found unmixed good cr evil.
These very obstructions placed in the
way of our commerce, though cer
tainly in that point of view a great in
jury, yet arc decidedly the best and
cheapest fortifications against inva
sion from a foreign power, it being
out of the question for a vessvl of war
of any magnitude to come within our
waters; and I do not ajrrcc with those
who talk about the degraded stale of
North Carolina, from these causes,
and who therefore solicit aid, as I
think, uselessly, from the General
Government, to remove them. And
Sir, I cannot but feel that North Ca
rolina is quite as much degraded bv
begging for the crums and drippings
trom this Government, as from natu
ral causes beyond human control.
Hut Sir, let us return to this bill
which, with one exception, is certain
ly the most extraordinary act of iegis
lution peculiar to this session. Sir,
it puts me more in mind of what
have often seen at log rollings in the
country in which I live it puts me
more in mind of a large heap or pile
of logs, rolled from all parts of the
new ground by the mutual aid of the
log rollers, thun any thins: else. Am
for one Sir, I think the best thing we
could do with it, would be to treat it
as we do the logs after being so rolled
together, set tire (o and burn it up
We do so however, with the loss
not precisely for the same reasons I
would this strange affair we burn
them because they are useless, and in
the way; but this thing is worse than
useless it "is a great positive evil.
These appropriations amount to the
enormous sum oi aoout a minion and
a quarter, for purposes, as characteri
sed by scientific engineers, of at least
doubtlul character; mostot tnem com
ing under the description to which
the term hydrographical has been ap
olied. This bill presents, in eniio
me, a fair sample of the whole system
of internal improvements, of which
we have since 1824 had some expe
rience. It is a system of iniquity
one in which from the very nature of
things, justice and equity cannot be
done; it is another pari oi tne general
system of transferring the property of
one set ot mei to others witnoui any
equivalent the Tariff, Internal Im
provement, Pensions, &c. &c. Tin
present bill, and the mammoth pen
sion bill, nassed through this House
ie
short time since, are instances of the
most extraordinary outrage, upon the
neonle. of their kind! With these
hanging upon the Treasury, hew are
we to pay the debt? Is it not known
to be a favorite object of the Execu-
tive, and still more, do not the people
generally look to the extinction of the
public debt as a political jubilee?
How then can we reconcile it to our
selves to vote for such enormities?
The system of internal improvement
and the tariff system, compose the no
table and far famed American Sys
tem. They are worthy of each olh
er, par nobjle, no, Sir, not nar no-
bile, but par ignobile, not fratrurri,
out aemonum not a noble pair of
brothers but an ignoble pair of dev-
Was not the devil, the author of
evil? The breeder of discord and
suffering to our first parents? Can
any thing be more in character? To
what, sir, do we owe our present po
litical divisions and discord, threat
ening the most calamitous conse
quences, but to that most unfortunate
and iniquitous syclem of legislation
which commenced soon after the closf
of the war which has been called or
known by the name of a new depar
ture in politics. Sir, it was a new
most unfortunate departure from all
those fixed principles upon which we
had so happily acted theretofore.
And what is the consequence? To
what a state ot things have we come?
Are we not now standing upon the
very brink ot political perdition? Is
not dismemberment, and disunion
talked of, and discussed here in this
House, in every group of members
a common subject out of doors, and
in the newspapers? And to what but
this demoniacal system of legislation,
scrambling for money and offices, is
it attributable? Who is so blind a
not to see that unless we spepdily re
turn to sound principles, ruin-must
come?
Mr. Speaker, the whole of this bill
is bad, but some of its parts are, if
possible, worse than others; indirect
ly, the power to erect toll grates, is as
serted, whether intended or not, and
though the rppropriations have been
said to he to finish works already he
gun, upon inspection, this will be seen
not to be wholly correct, and even if
true, it would not alter the principles.
It you begin in error it will not be
come right b' keeping in the same
course, and as the saying is, throw
ing good money after bad. We al
so have thirty thousand dollars for
surveys, which is the initiation of all
works of this kind, and after once
commenced, you are told if you do
not go on, all the money you have
applied will be thrown away, and
this, by some, is held a sufficient rea
son lor throwing away thousands and
millions. Is it possible the people
who furnish this money can longer be
willing to be taxed lor such numosesf
11 so, God help them!
This surveying or engineering, a
it has been called, was. I well recol
lect, the commencemenl of this busi
ness as a system professed lv debated
on the ground of Irving the general
principle ol a system ot internal im
provements. borne three or lour
years ago, when the present outs
were the then ins, I recollect fre
quently to have heard the charge
made ol engineering the people, buy
ing them up with their own money.
Now, Sir, whether this was so or not,
it is not necessary for me to say but
this I will say, that I do not wish
that any wag shall have it in his pow
er, whether deservedly or not, to say
ol us, the parties here, what was said
of the political parties in England:
What this rogue loses, that rogue wins,
They are both birds of a feather;
So here's damn the outs, & damn the ins,
And damn them all together.
I hope and desire the parties here
may never justly be subjected to any
such wit and sarcasm. Would to
God, Sir, we could have but one par
ty one great party all the mem
bers of which, instead of scrambling
for place and public money, should
be found vieing with each other in
disinterested efforts to promote the
public good. Viewing the whole of
this bill, individually and collective
ly, as improper, as being objectiona
ble upon the same grounds, one part
with another, it would be difficult to
give a preference to any one item over
another. It was, I think, some three
years since, that upon the Maysville
road bill, 1 took the liberty of ad
dressing some remarks to the House
under circumstances somewhat simi
tar. I consider the principles of the
wo bills precisely the same; they
K)th merit the same fate, and I most
earnestly wish this mav meet the
same fate which befel the other. As
io principle, I have said they are the
-ame; this as to the extent of mis
chief is much the worst. I recollect
aking occasion in my remarks on
that subject, to say, that I. would as
soon have voted for it as for any mea
sure of a similar character even in mv
own district; this I will repeat, and
snouict lever break through the rule
wnscn the Constitution has, as I be
lieve, prescribed to me, and should
ever vote for any one subject of this
cnaracter, 1 should feel myself in
honor bound to vole for everv feasable
one of similar character from Passa-
maquoddy to Florida and from the
Atlantic trontier to the confines of
the far WTest. If I was to spend an
opinion, on the practical utility of the
several objects of improvement pro
posed in the bill, 1 am not quite cer
tain that I should not feel bound to
say, that probably more good had
open, or might be done by appropria
tions for the removal of casual ob-
Mructions in the Western waters, usu
ally termed planters and sawyers,
which I understand are formed of
trees falling into the river by the giv
ing way ot the banks from being
washed by lrequcnt freshes, than any
others. I consider them, however.
no more entitled to be caUed national
than any other objects. I should like
to know when they began to be na
tional, it they are so, while standing
as they grew on the bank, after fall
ing in the water, or not until they be
came fixed in the sand and mud at
the bottom of the river. which I sup
pose constitutes them planters, and
that up and down motion, caused by
the pressure of the current, constitutes
them sawyers. With regard to the
nationality, and therefore constitu
tionality of the great Cumberland
road, because it goes to parts of seve
ral States; why, Sir, upon that prin
ciple, every road or path in every
State may be considered national; be
cause every path or private road com
municates with some other, which
leads to any and all others in the U
nion, and therefore they are all and
each national, if any one be. Per
haps, however, the real thing which
gives nationality to all things of this
character, is the national money, ta
ken or to be taken, out of the Na
tional Treasury. But, Mr. Speak
er, enough in relation to the details
of this affair; a few words upon the
constitutional principle and I have
done. I am sorry to have intruded
so long upon the time and patience of
the House, but hope for some few
crums of allowance in consideration
of past forbearance; for it will be ad
mitted that I have not often trespass
ed in this way. I have for years con
tented myself with being in some de
gree a mere looker on in Venice; and
as a further consideration for trespas
sing on its time, I will assure the
House that this is the last time I will
ever open my lips, so far as at present
advised, upon the subject of internal
improvement, further than to say
No. This privilege I shall still claim,
so long as I have the honor of being a
member of this body.
Mr. Speaker, when the subject of
internal improvement was broached
and first discussed as a system, like
the Bank question, it was sought for
and claimed to be found, in some half
a dozen of the granted powers, enu
merated in the Constitution; and like
that for this reason was entitled to the
character of a vagrant power.
The power, however, to regulate
commerce, seems to be in later times
principally relied on: this, and a
branch of this power the power to
place custom nouses, and designate
by law, collection or revenue districts.
This latter branch of the power car
ries its own condemnation upon its
face; because by placing custom hou
ses and designating districts, Congress
could assume indefinitely the juris
diction over all subjects of internal
improvement from the sea coast to the
very sources of our rivers; some hav
ing already extended very far into the
interior of the country. But the dif
ficulty does not end here. What has
happened, may possibly be agair.)
formerly, for collecting direct and
internal taxes, the States were laid
off into collection or revenue districts.
And thus, upon the principle asserted,
Congress could assume jurisdiction
over every thing of a local character
in the country.
The general power to regulate com
merce, therefore, is the power partic
ularly relied on. It seems to have
been the intention of our predecessors
to settle and establish as a fundamen
tal principle in our political institu
tions, that the State Governments,
and Federal Government, should be
considered as distinct and separate
agencies, established by the people for
different purposes. The 9th and 10th
amendments, and the second para
graph of the 6th article of the Consti
tution, will, upon due consideration,
satisfy any reasonable mind, that such
a principle is established. In this
view I am sustained by a doctrine
fairly deduced from the Constitution,
by no less authority than the Supreme
Court, that all the' powers of the
General Government are plenary or
full powers over the subjects commit
ted by the Constitution to its manage
ment. This being the case, all will
admit that they must be exclusive
powers; and it follows, of necessity,
that they cannot be concurrent with
the powers of the State Governments!
To sustain the doctrines here laid
down, which 1 think incontrovertible,
I will appeal to my authorities for
support. The 9!h amendment says:
"The enumeration in the Constitution
of certain rights, shall not be construed
to deny or disparage others retained by
the people."
10th:
"The fioivers not delegated to the Uni
ted States by the Constitution, nor pro
hibited by it to the States, are reserved
to the States respectively, or to the peo
ple." These two amendments settle clear
ly the principle of separation of the
powers granted and retained. The
second paragraph of the 6th article of
the Constitution is in these words:
"This Constitution, and thelaws of the
United States which shall be made in
pursuance thereof, and all treaties made,
or which shall be made, under the autho
rity of the United States, shall be the
supreme law of the land; and the Judges
in every State shall be bound thereby,
any thing in the Constitution or laws of
any State to the contrary notwithstand
ing." To shew the pertinency more clear
ly of the doctrine I have laid down to
these authorities, I will quote the lan
guage of the Supreme Court in the
case of Gibbons vs. Ogden. Alluding
to the power to regulate commerce,
the Lhiet Justice in delivering the
opinion of the Court says:
"We are now arrived at the enquiry,
what is this power? It is the cower to
regulate, that is, to firescribe the rule by
which commerce is to be povemeH.
This power like all others vested in Con
gress, is complete in itselt. It has always
been understood, that the sovereignty of
Congress, thoueh limited to specified ob
jects, is plenary as to these objects."
This doctrine can only mean that
the powers granted to Congress by
the people in the Constitution, are full
or plenary powers over the subjects
committed to its agency, and conse
quently exclusive powers. The
word sovereignty, if applied to Con
gress, as it sometimes has been, would
be improper. Congress is not the
severeign power of the country, but
an agency with powers plenary
quoad hoc over particular subjects.
Its powers are delegated only, they
are therefore of necessity subordinate,
and not sovereign powers. We all
agree that the sovereign, power is in
the people, if this be so, having never
alienated, they still retain it. The
Constitution itself is an act of
fundamental legislation by this very
sovereignty, delegating through this
power of attorney, secondary powers
of legislation, agreed on all hands to
be not only delegated but limited and
enumerated. Again the Court says:
"A full power to regulate a particular
thing, implies the whole power. A grant
of the whole is incompatible with the ex
istence of a right in another to any part
of it."
This language is appropriate and
clear, and, taken in connexion with
the evident sense and meaning of th
foregoing authorities, establishes tho
principle, that neither government
can interfere with the appropriate and
constitutional powers of the other.
Let us recapitulate. -A1J tjjp povytrs