of the wealth and strength of our confederated Republic, must be the frequent subject of our deliberations, and shall be advanced by all proper means in our power."

A committee of the House, consisting of William Smith, of S. C.; George Clymer, of Pa.; and John Lawrence, of N. Y., in their response, by unanimous agreement of the House, said:

"We concur with you in the sentiment that agriculture, commerce, and manufactures are entitled to legislative protection, and that the promotion of science and literature will contribute to the security of a free Government; in the progress of our deliberations we shall not lose sight of objects so worthy of our regard."

Congress in their first and preceding session had legislated constitutionally for the objects mentioned, but the acts of 1789 were reenacted with amendments in 1790. Thus, the promise to the President was redeemed.

President McKinley's Last Words. It well becomes Presidents and Congresses to think and to speak frequently and wisely of American Commerce inclusive of Navigation. The last words on this subject, in the last public speech, of our popular and late President, WILLIAM MCKINLEY, should deeply impress our Senators and Representatives. Said he :

"We must encourage our merchant marine. We must have more ships. They must be under the American flag, built and manned and owned by Americans. These will not only be profitable in a commercial sense; they will be messengers of peace and amity wherever they go."

What were his views as to the means of accomplishing these things? Were they the "proper means" referred to by Washington, and the Senate and House in response, in 1790? The writer is not aware that Mr. McKinley ever gave his approval of methods in plainer language than that of six years ago, in his letter accepting a nomination to his first term, when he said: -

"The declaration of the Republican platform in favor of the upbuilding of our merchant marine has my hearty approval. The policy of discriminating duties in favor of our shipping, which prevailed in the early years of our history, should be again promptly adopted by Congress and vigorously supported

until our prestige and supremacy on the seas are fully attained."

Thus were the " proper means "of the early statutes publicly approved. Not only this, but at the date of this letter Mr. McKinley was well aware of the failure in 1891 of the "Farquhar shipping bill," based on "bounty; one great objection to it being that fact; and he was aware, also, that, in 1880, the fifth resolution of the Republican platform read thus:

“That we deem it the duty of Congress to develop and im prove our seacoast and harbors, but insist that further subsidies to private persons or corporations must cease."

Mr. McKinley knew, also, that the Democratic platforms discountenanced subsidies, even for postal service occasionally, and that only the clearest constitutional means—which he so fully approved — could be employed for the rehabilitation of our marine in the foreign trade, with any prospect of proving a lasting

success.

Constitutional Ship Protection. When we consider the merits of means proposed for upbuilding our marine, it is not to the point to cite the course of other nations. We are not at liberty to adopt promiscuous measures. It cannot be questioned that our national Government is exceptional in character. We have a written Constitution that was prepared by Delegates of Independent States and afterwards ratified by vote of the citizens of said States. Its powers are limited, and such only as are expressly granted, and to be found in that instrument; or such as are properly incident to said powers and necessary to their existence. Proper and lawful means of ship encouragement can be found in the Constitution, but any means not there provided we may not wisely or profitably adopt. There are many things that foreign Governments may do, that our own has no power to do. We have no authority anywhere to choose or crown a King. The Constitution has provided for an Executive to be called PRESIDENT. In like manner, if we may not aid or support, protect or encourage a marine, by subsidies, bounties, or gifts of any kind paid to or bestowed upon shipowners, it is because the Constitution grants to Congress the power to regulate our commerce for the purpose mentioned. And we will find

this to be the case. Where the Constitution has provided a power for any purpose, it has not provided other powers to take its place. Every way was considered and the best chosen. Thus were avoided disorder and confusion in the work of Government.

Moreover, Congress recognized the legal way to create and maintain a merchant marine for many years after the adoption of the Constitution, when it was induced to suspend the regulation of commerce in certain cases, namely, those governed by "reciprocity" conventions or treaties. But in all other cases our commerce and navigation to-day are under Constitutional regulations. With regard to domestic trade-coasting, river, and lake navigation this fact cannot be questioned. With respect to foreign trade, we have only to annul, lawfully, our maritime reciprocity conventions to demonstrate the fact, that our entire traffic of commerce and of navigation — is again under regulations the same that were suspended. Under what authority has Congress acted to bring about these facts? Clause three of section eight of article ONE of the Constitution reads thus:

"The Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States,1 and with the Indian tribes."

In its broader meaning, "commerce" includes both trade and transportation -navigation the carrying trade. Section eight of article ONE of the Constitution sets forth the powers that Congress may exercise, while section nine describes those which shall not be exercised. Clause seventeen of section eight confers power" To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." Clause six of section nine provides that "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law," etc. Of course, an appropriation must be for a Constitutional object. How shall this fact be determined? Madison's Rule of Construction. It is the truth of history 1 At this time the several States had conflicting regulations.

that no citizen of the United States contributed more to the founding of our present Government, to the making of the Constitution, to its advocacy and its early application — than James Madison, of Virginia. In the 45th number of the "Federalist," p. 292, he says:—

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State Governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."

Mr. Madison's sound rule of construction as to whether a given power has been granted is that

"Whenever a question arises concerning a particular power, the first question is whether the power be expressed in the Constitution. If it be, the question is decided. If it be not expressed, the next inquiry must be whether it is properly an incident to an expressed power and necessary to its execution. If it be, it may be exercised by Congress. If it be not, Congress cannot exercise it."

"A power to be incidental, must not be exercised for ends which make it a principal or substantive power, independent of the principal power to which it is an incident."

To illustrate the latter paragraph: the carrying trade is a part of commerce; shipbuilding is not a part, but it is a close incident; therefore, the same power that may be invoked to encourage commerce and navigation may also be applied to protect shipbuilding. We find no power in the Constitution authoriz ing subsidy to the general marine; if a power of incidental character, it must belong to the regulation of commerce and be necessary to its execution. But the power to regulate commerce has been successfully exercised without it, therefore, it cannot be necessary. And it cannot attach as an incident, for it is proposed as an independent power to supersede a principal or substantive power.

No Power whatever for Shipping Subsidies or Bounties. From the foregoing considerations, and from the early acts of Congress, it is positively certain, that encouragement of Navigation by regulations of commerce is Constitutional. Subsidy for the support of "Mail and Naval" steam lines can be referred to the powers granted " to establish post-offices and postroads," and "to provide and maintain a navy” clauses seven and twelve of section eight of article one of the Constitution — but no clause, line, or word authorizes Treasury aid in any form to assist freighting vessels in gaining or maintaining ocean transportation, or for conducting any other business. The use of Treasury funds to promote the general carrying trade cannot be an incident to the power to regulate our commerce, because, for one reason, this power itself is granted for that purpose, has served it, and can serve it again; and because the incidental power cannot supersede the principal. It has been suggested that possibly there is power in clause one of section eight of article one of the Constitution, that may be availed of for the payment of subsidies, etc. That clause reads thus:

"The Congress shall have power: 1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States."

There are businesses, trades, and callings innumerable in the United States. The "general welfare " requires that each and every one be prosperous, but, if not, is it meant that Congress shall help the situation by an exercise of the tax-collecting and distributing power? Such a view would be absurd, not alone from the number of trades frequently needing improvement, but from the amount of money to be provided, according to circumstances. The business of Government would be big, indeed, under such a system. Nothing of the kind could ever have been intended. Besides, if it were intended that navigation should be encouraged under clause one and its expression of "general welfare," why was also clause three inserted in section eight? And what can be its use? Of a certainty, its