been shown, (§ 128-130, 267.) The power to borrow money also is necessary to pay the debts, provide for the national defence, and for other purposes to which the ordinary revenue of the nation may be inadequate. To supply the treasury on extraordinary occasions by loans, has been found more convenient than direct taxation. By means of them, the immediate wants of the government are supplied, and the sums borrowed may afterwards be paid from the regular revenues of the nation.

284. The purpose for which congress has found it especially necessary to exercise the power of borrowing money, is the payment of the public debt. By the articles of confederation, the government assumed the public debt previously contracted to support the war; and the present constitution imposed on the United States all debts contracted before its adoption. (§ 552.)

§ 285. The manner in which the government borrows money, is as follows:

When money is wanted to pay a debt, congress passes an act authorizing the secretary of the treasury, or some other person, to borrow the money, and make the United States debtor for the same. The act states the amount to be borrowed, the time when it is to be paid, and the rate of interest. Persons who wish to lend money then subscribe, in books opened for that purpose, the sums they will respectively lend; and for the sums so subscribed and lent, certificates are given by the agent of the government, stating the amount for which the United States are indebted. The debt so contracted, and for which the certificates are given, are called stocks. То persons having these certificates, the government pays the interest that accrues on them, quarterly, or as often as the act expresses. These certificates are often bought and sold like any other merchantable commodity. When they are sold at a price equal to the amount expressed in them, stocks are said to be at par. When their market price is higher or lower than their nominal value, they are said to be above or below par.

286. The whole amount of the public debt existing

Describe the manner in which government borrows money. What are stocks? § 286. What was the amount of the public debt when

when the constitution was adopted, was nearly $80,000,000. A tax upon individual property to liquidate so large a debt, would have been, at that time, extremely burdensome to the citizens. Provision was therefore made by the constitution for this purpose. By this means, together with such portion of the revenue as was not required for the support of the government, and the proceeds of the sales of public lands, congress has been enabled so to control the public debt, as almost entirely to prevent the necessity of resorting to direct taxation.

$287. By the purchase of Louisiana, in 1803, and the expenses of the late war, the public debt was increased to more than $127,000,000. One of the means adopted to liquidate the public debt, was the creation, at an early period, of a sinking fund, which is a sum of money, or part of the national revenue, which is set apart for the payment of the public debt. Additional yearly appropriations were made, from time to time, until, in consequence of the augmentation of the public debt by the Louisiana stock, it became necessary to increase them to $8,000,000.

288. By the act of 1817, so much of all former acts as related to appropriations for the purchase of the principal, and payment of the interest of the funded debt, was repealed; and a yearly appropriation of $10,000,000, arising from duties on imports and tonnage, internal duties, and sales of public lands, was made for the reduction of the public debt By the application of this sum every year, together with such other portion of the yearly revenue as remained after paying the expenses of the government, the national debt has been extinguished.

the constitution was adopted? How has direct taxation been avoided in its payment? § 287. What was the amount of the public debt soon after the late war? What means were provided for its liquidation? § 288. What farther provision was made for this purpose, in 1817?

CHAPTER IX.

Regulation of Commerce.

289. CONGRESSs shall have power, "To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, "and with the Indian tribes."-Art. 1, sec. 8, cl. 3.

§ 290. Commerce signifies a mutual change of goods, productions, or property of any kind, between nations or individuals. ● When we speak of the commerce of a nation, we have reference to its trade with other nations. The general power of congress to regulate commerce is not confined to the mere buying and selling, or exchanging of com. modities; but extends to navigation, and every species of commercial intercourse with foreign nations, and among the several states.

§ 291. The absence of this power in the articles of confederation, was one of the principal defects of that system which were to be supplied by the constitution. Each state had the power to regulate its commerce with the other states, and with foreign nations; and each, consequently, imposed such duties on the productions of neighboring states and foreign nations as a regard for its own exclusive interests dictated. The mutual jealousies and rivalries which prevailed among the states, induced the adoption of different systems of policy in the different states, which destroyed the prosperity of the whole. To remedy these evils, and to prevent their recurrence, the power to regulate commerce was vested in the general government.

§292. The power "to regulate commerce," as also the power "to lay and collect duties, imposts, and excises, to 66 pay the debts and provide for the common defence and "general welfare," has been employed in laying duties for the purpose of encouraging domestic or home manufactures. These are called protecting duties, being calculated to protect our own citizens against loss from foreign competition.

§ 289. To what general objects does the power to regulate commerce extend? § 290. What is commerce? What does it include? § 291. Why was this power granted to congress? $292. For what

§ 293. The nature and object of protecting duties may be thus illustrated:

Suppose the people of the United States to receive their supplies of broadcloth from a foreign country, where the arts have been carried to a high degree of perfection, and whose citizens, from their long experience and superior skill, are enabled to manufacture and sell this commodity at prices below the cost of manufacturing the same in this country. There would be no inducement to our own citizens to engage in the manufacture of cloths, because they could obtain for them in the market no more than is paid for foreign goods of like description. Suppose the price of a particular quality of foreign broadcloth to be three dollars a yard, and the cost of manufacturing cloth of the same quality in this country to be four dollars a yard. Now, let the government lay a duty of fifty per cent. on foreign cloths, and the purchaser of the imported article must pay for it four dollars and fifty cents. Thus the preference would be given to the domestic fabric, and the manufacturer would be protected against injury from the competition of foreigners.

§ 294. But protective duties are by some considered unconstitutional. They maintain that neither the power to lay duties to promote the general welfare, nor the power to regu. late trade, authorizes congress to lay duties for the encouragement of domestic manufactures; that these clauses grant power only to lay duties for the purpose of revenue; and that, when congress imposes duties beyond what may be wanted to meet the necessary expenditures of the government, it transcends its constitutional powers. A construction of this power which would authorize its being exercised for the purpose of protection, would justify its use on the most trivial occasions, on the plea that a measure is demanded by the general welfare. The framers of the constitution cannot be presumed to have intended to confer a power liable to so sweeping and loose a construction.

§ 295. It is maintained, on the other hand, that the powers granted in these clauses must imply the power to lay duties

purpose has this power been employed? § 293. Illustrate the nature and operation of a protecting duty. § 294. What objections are made to this exercise of the power to regulate trade? § 295. By what argu

to encourage domestic manufactures, because the general welfare may imperiously demand such encouragement. As foreign nations, to favor their own commercial interests, might impose heavy duties upon our productions, it is not probable that the framers of the constitution should have overlooked the necessity of a power somewhere in the government, to countervail the restrictions of foreign nations upon our manufactures and commerce, by a like policy. The common defence, also, it is said, requires the encouragement of home manufactures. The sudden interruption, by war, of our commercial intercourse with a nation on which we had been accustomed to depend for the necessaries of life, and perhaps even for the instruments of war, would place the country in an unfavorable condition to defend itself against an independent enemy.

§ 296. The late president Madison, whose authority on constitutional questions is held in the highest respect, and who was himself a distinguished member of the convention that framed the constitution, made known his opinions on this subject, in 1828, a time when the country, as well as congress, was not a little engaged in its discussion. Some of the reasons given by him in favor of the constitutionality of a protective tariff, are contained, in a condensed form, it the following paragraphs:

(1.) The general meaning of the phrase, "to regulate trade," at the time when it was inserted in the constitution, and as understood and used by all commercial and manufacturing nations, especially Great Britain, whose commercial vocabulary is the parent of ours, implies the power of protecting manufactures.

(2.) In the state conventions, in the course of their deliberations on the adoption of the constitution, the transferring of this power from the states to the general government was a subject of particular remark, and its existence acknowledged by both the advocates and opponents of the constitution.

(3.) The exercise of this power by the states is prohibited in the constitution. If congress does not possess the

ments is its constitutionality supported? § 296. State briefly the reasons of Mr. Madison in favor of a protective tariff. § 298. To