按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
man… 261 ifestly unconstitutional； as probably are the present so…called national banks。 The United States Bank was a private or particular corporation； and the present national banks are only corporations of the same sort； though organized under a general law。 The pretence that they are established to supply a national currency； does not save their constitutionality； for the convention has not given the General government the power nor imposed on it the duty of furnishing a national currency。 To coin money； and regulate the value thereof； is something very different from authorizing private companies to issue bank notes； on the basis of the public stocks held as private property； or even on what is called a specie basis。 To claim the power under the general welfare clause would be a simple mockery of good sense。 It is no more for the general welfare than any other successful private business。 The private welfare of each is； no doubt； for the welfare of all； but not therefore is it the 〃general welfare；〃 for what is private； particular in its nature； is not and cannot be general。 To understand by general welfare that which is for the individual welfare of all or the greater number； would be to claim for the General government all the powers of government； and 262 to deny that very division of powers which is the crowning merit of the American system。 The general welfare； by the very force of the words themselves； means the common as distinguished from the private or individual welfare。 The system of national banks may or may not be a good and desirable system； but it is difficult to understand the constitutional power of the General government to establish it。
On the ground that its powers are general； not particular； the General government has no power to lay a protective tariff。 It can lay a tariff for revenue； not for protection of home manufactures or home industry； for the interests fostered； even though indirectly advantageous to the whole people； are in their nature private or particular； not general interests； and chiefly interests of private corporations and capitalists。 Their incidental or even consequential effects do not change their direct and essential nature。 So with domestic slavery。 Slavery comes under the head of private rights； whether regarded on the side of the master or on the side of the slave。 The right of a citizen to hold a slave； if a right at all； is the private right of property； and the right of the slave to his freedom is a private and personal right； and neither is placed under the safeguard of the General government； 263 which has nowhere； unless in the District of Columbia and the places over which it has exclusive legislative power in all cases whatsoever； either the right to establish it or to abolish it； except perhaps under the war power； as a military necessity； an indemnity for the past； or a security for the future。
This applies to what are called Territories as well as to the States。 The right of the government to govern the Territories in regard to private and particular rights and interests； is derived from no express grant of power； and is held only ex necessitatethe United States owning the domain； and there being no other authority competent to govern them。 But； as in the case of all powers held ex necessitate； the power is restricted to the absolute necessity in the case。 What are called Territorial governments； to distinguish them from the State governments； are only provisional governments； and can touch private rights and interests no further than is necessary to preserve order and prepare the way for the organization and installation of a regular State government。 Till then the law governing private rights is the law that was in force； if any such there was； when the territory became by purchase； by 264 conquest； or by treaty； attached to the domain of the United States。
Hence the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the ordinance of l787； prohibiting slavery in what was called the territory of the Northwest； and the so…called Missouri Compromise； prohibiting slavery north of the parallel 36' 30'。 The Wilmot proviso was for the same reason unconstitutional。 The General government never had and has not any power to exclude slavery from the Territories； any more than to abolish it in the States。 But slavery being a local institution； sustained neither by the law of nature nor the law of nations； no citizen migrating from a slave State could carry his slaves with him； and hold them as slaves in the Territory。 Rights enacted by local law are rights only in that locality； and slaves carried by their masters into a slave State even； are free； unless the State into which they are carried enacts to the contrary。 The only persons that could be held as slaves in a Territory would be those who were slaves or the children of those who were slaves in the Territory when it passed to the United States。 The whole controversy on； slavery in the Territories； and which culminated in the civil war； was wholly unnecessary； and never could have 265 occurred had the constitution been properly understood and adhered to by both sides。 True； Congress could not exclude slavery from the Territory； but neither could citizens migrating to them hold slaves in them； and so really slavery was virtually excluded； for the inhabitants in nearly all of them； not emigrants from the States after the cession to the United States； were too few to be counted。
The General government has power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization； to which all the States must conform； and it was very proper that it should have this power； so as to prevent one State from gaining by its naturalization laws an undue advantage over another； but the General government has itself no power to naturalize a single foreigner； or in any case to say who shall or who shall not be citizens； either of a State or of the United States； or to declare who may or may not be electors even of its own officers。 The convention ordains that members of the house of representatives shall be chosen by electors who have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislature； but the State determines these qualifications； and who do or do not possess them； that the senators shall be chosen by the State legislatures； and 266 that the electors of President and Vice…President shall be appointed in such manner as the respective State legislatures may direct。 The whole question of citizenship； what shall or shall not be the qualifications of electors； who shall or shall not be freemen； is reserved to the； States； as coming under the head of personal or private rights and franchises。 In practice； the exact line of demarcation may not always have been strictly observed either by the General government or by the State governments； but a careful study of the constitution cannot fail to show that t