Speech of Mr. Moore, of New York

mon defence and general welfare,” or, what amounts to the same thing— in the will of Congress,—object to any case coming within that principle, Woweyer dangerous and pernicious in its consequences. As this clause of the constitution has been, and is still much relied oh by the advocates of a United States Bank, I will take the liberty of introducing such authority in Opposition to their views, as will, 1 trust, have weight, both with this house and the nation. The fourth resolution'passed by the General Assembly of Virginia, in December, 1798, reads as follows : “ That the General Assembly doth also express its deep regret, that a spirit has in sundry instances been manifested by the Federal'Government, to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charter which defines them; and that indications have'appeared of ‘a design to expound certain general phrases (which having been copied from the very limited grant of powers in the former articles of confederation, were the less liable to be misconstrued,) So as to destroy the meaning and dffect of the particular enumeration which necessarily explains and limits the general phrases; and s o as to consolidate the States, by degress, into one sovereignty; the obvious tendency, and inevitable result of which would be to transform the present republican system of the United States into an absolute, or at best a mixed monarchy.” Mr. Madison, in his report commenting bn this resolution, observes: “ The first question here to be considered is, whether a spirit has in sundry instances been manifested by the Federal Government to enlarge its powers by forced constructions of the constitutional charier. . “ The general assembly having declared their opinion merely,.by regretting in general terms, that forced constructions.for enlarging the federal.powers have taken place; it does not appear to the committee necessary to go into a specification of every instance to which the resolution may allude. The alien and sedition acts, being particularly named in a succeeding resolution, are of course to be understood.as included in the allusion. Omitting others which have less occupied public attention, or been less extensively, regarded as unconstitutional, the resolution may be presumed to refer particularly to the bank law, which, from the circumstances of its passage, as well as the latitude5 Qf construction on which it is founded, strikes the attention with singular force ; and the carriage tax, distinguished also by circumstances in its history having a similar tendency.” . * , *. * * * ■'* * * “1. The general phrases here meant must be those “of providing for the common defence and general welfare.” ... “In the ‘Article of Confederation,’ the phrases are.used as follows, in Art. VIII: ‘All charges of war, and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defence and general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress assembled, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury, which shall be supplied by the several States, in proporlipn to the value of all land within each State, granted to, or surveyed for, any person, as such land and the buildings and improvements thereon shall be estimated, according to such mode as the United Slate's in Congress assembled, shall from time to time direct and appoint.’ “In the existing constitution, they make the following part of sec. 8: ‘ The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts,,and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common 'defence and general welfare of the United States.’ “ This similarity in the use of these phrases in the two great federal charters, might well be considered as rendering their meaning less liable to be misconstrued in the latter; because it will scarcely be said, that in the former, they were ever understood to be either a general grant of power, w lo authorize tlie requisition dr application of money by the old Congress to the common defence and general welfare, except in. cases afterwards enumerated,. which explained and limited their meaning, and if such was the limited meaning attached to these phrases in the very instrument revised and remodelled by the present constitution, it can never be supposed that when copied into this constitution, a different meaning ought to be attached to them. “ That, notwithstanding this remarkable security against misconstruction, a design has been indicated toexpound these’ phrases in the constitution; so as to destroy the effect of the particular enumeration of powers ’ by which it explains and limits them, . must have fallen under the observation of those who have attended to the course of. public transactions. Not to multiply proofs on this subject, it will suffice to refer to the debate’s of the federal legislature, in which arguments have on different occasions been.drawn, with apparent effect, from-these phrases, in their indefinite meaning.—Elliot's Debates, vol. 4. p. 577—8.

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=