VETO Oh THE RIVER AND HlRBOR BILL.
{"newspaper_name": "Mississippi Democrat.", "edition": "01", "page": "pNone", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 4084, "word_count": 704, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9424999952316284], "ccnet_perplexity": [1150.800048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}



VETO OF THE RIVER AND HARBOR BILL.
To the House Of Representatives.:


have considered the bill entitled "An
act making appropriations for the improve
ment of certain harbors and rivers" with
the care which its importance demands,
and now return the same 10 the House OF
Representatives in which it originated,
with my objections to its becoming law
The bill proposes 10 appropriate 1885,
450 dollars to be applied to more than for
ty distinct and separate objects of i'm
provement. On examining lis provisions,
and the variety Of OBJ ects Of improvement
which it embraces, many OF them of To-
cal character, it is difficult to conceive, i'll
it shall be sanctioned and become law,
what practical constitutional restraint can
hereafter be imposed upon the most ex.
tended system of internal Improvements
by the federal government in all parts ot
the Union. The constitution has not, in
my judgment, conferred upon the federal
government the power to construct works
ofinternai improvem within the States,
or 10 appropriate money from the treasury
for that purpose. That this bill assumes
for the federal government the right to ex-
ercise this power, cannot, think, be doubt
ed. The approved course of the govern
ment, and the acknowledgement judg-
ment of the people, have denied the exist.
ence of such power under the constitu-
ton Several of my predecessors have
denied its existence in the most solemn
forms.


The general proposition that the lede-
raj governmentd does not possess this power
is so well settled, and has for a considera-
Bile period been SO generally acquiesced
in, that it is not deemed necessary 10 re-
ierate the arguments by which it is s1s-
tened. Nor do deem it necessary, after
the full and elaborate discussions which
have taken place before the country on
this subject, to do more than state the
general considerations which have sails
fed me of the nconstitutionality and in.
expedency of the exercise of such a
power.


II is not questioned that the federal GO
vernment is one Of limited powers Its
powers are such, and such only as are eX-
pressly granted in the constitution, or are
properly incident to the expressly granted
powers, and necessary TO their execution
Ia determining whether given power has
been granted sound rule of construction
has been laid down by Mr.. Madison That
rule is, that whenever 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 il be not expressed, the
next inquiry must be, whether it is pro-
perIy an incident to an expressed power,
and necessary 10 its execution. If it be,
it may be exercised by Congress. If it
be not, Congress cannot exercise it, 1t
is not pretended that there is any express
grant in the constitution conferring on
Congress the power in question. Is it
then an incidental power, necessary and
proper for the execution OF any Of the
granted powers? All the granted powers,
it is confidently affirmed, may be effectu-
alv executed without the aid of such an
incident. ga power TO be incidental must
not be exercised for ends which make it a
principal, or substantive power, indepen
dent of the principal power to which it is
an incident" 1t is not enough that it may
be regarded by Congress as Convenient, OF
that its exercise would advance the pub
lie veal. 1t must be necessary and pro
per 10 the execution of the principal ex
pressed power to which it is an incident
and without which such principal powe
cannot be carried into effect The whole


frame of the federal constitution prove
that the government which it creates wa
I intended 10 be one of limited and speci
fed powers. A construction of the con
stitulion so broad as that by which tn
i power in question is defended, tends i'm
percepuby to consolidation Of power II
4 agovernment intended by lis framers
A be thus limited 10 It's authority. "Ihe oh


Vlous tendency and inevitable result OF
N Consolidation Of the States into one sove


reIgnty, would be to transform the repub


lican system Of the Uuited States into