Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

DEBATES OF CONGRESS. 383 FEBRUARY, 1826.] Repair of Post Roads in MIississippi. [SENATE. ask the question which he had put to him, with of the United States. The stipulation was so much confidence-and if he could not put fairly made and never rescinded, and was rehis finger on that clause of the Constitution of served by the express clause in the constitution the United States which authorized the appro- to be valid, and effectual. Mr. H. thought, on priation for this road, lie would not make it. this point, firom this clause of the constitution, He was not one of those who believed that the power might be fairly inferred. they might obtain that power by construction, Mr. JoHNsox, of Kentucky, referred to the which was not plainly and unequivocally second volume of the Laws of the United granted in the instrument. He was not an States, and cited, as cases in point, in answer to advocate for constructive or implied powers. He Mr. COBB, the roads which had been made by understood that, at the time this Territory the United States, from Fort Hawkins, in Georbelonged to the United States, they made a gia, and Fort Stoddart, in Alabama. These compact with the Indians that a road might be precedents he thought conclusive, as to the made, which should not be interrupted. After- power to make the road now under discussion. wards the State of Mississippi was admitted There had been an appropriation for opening into the Union, and the road had not been this road, and they now asked for an appropriamade, and now they applied to Congress to make tion for repairing it. The appropriations for this road. This was the clause of theconstitution opening this road, had been made under the on which he relied for the power to make it: administrations of Jefferson, Madison, and Mon" New States may be admitted by the Congress roe; and, if his friiend concurred with him as to into this Union, but no new State shall be formed the expediency of the measure, and it was not or erected within the jurisdiction of any other to be doubted, where repeated appropriations State, nor any State be formed by the junction had settled this question, he hoped he would of two or more States, or parts of States, permit the constitutional question to rest, till he without the consent of the Legislatures of the came to matters of greater moment, when it States concerned, as well as of the Congress." would give him more pleasure to hear him, and The main proposition here, Mr. H. remarked, he always heard him with pleasure on that was connected with another clause: " The great and vital question. On the present occaCongress shall have power to dispose of, and sion, Mr. J. did hope that, if the Senate bemake all needful rules and regulations respect- lieved in the propriety and necessity of the ing the Territory or other property belonging measure, they would make the appropriation, to the United States: and nothing in this con- after what had been stated, by way of matter stitution shall be so construed as to prejudice of fact, on the subject. any claims of the United States, or of any Mr. COBB remembered the circumstances particular State." This, Mr. H. said, was all alluded to by the gentleman from Kentucky; to be taken into consideration, referring to the he was a member of Congress at that time, and Territory that then was to be carved into States, he voted against the appropriation for the road and the Territory that should afterwards remain. from Fort Hawkins, although it was in Georgia. The last clause was a very important one; He hoped the time was not yet come when the "new States may be admitted into the Union." Senate were to be tied down by a precedent of Connect the last clause with that,;' nothing in such a character as that. He could refer the this constitution shall be so construed," &c. gentleman to other precedents. In that same Why was it inserted? "New States may be book, he would probably find a certain law, admitted into the Union," but the property called a sedition law: the gentleman would which was reserved for the Territories was certainly not deny that that law was unconintended, some of it, to belong to the States, stitutional; if he admitted that, it was no prewhen they should become States. This clause cedent to settle a question of constitutionality, was intended to preserve all the rights of the and it would be still lawful for them to object United States and of the States, when they to another sedition law, on the ground of its were admitted into the Union, and all the stipu- unconstitutionality. The gentleman would also lations previously made between the United find a law for the making of the Cumberland States and the Territories of the United States, Road, which originated during the good old days were to be firm and inviolable, in this latter of Jefferson. Mr. C. said, in his opinion, that clause of this article of the constitution. If also was unconstitutional, and, so far as regarded that were the case, and Mr. HI. said he could himself, it would form no precedent to him, conceive no other reason why this clause should and he should make the same reply in regard to be inserted, he would recur to the fact, that the every other statute that the gentleman should right of the United States to make a road bring in support of this bill. He contended within the Indian country, had been stipulated that no constitutional question could be settled for, and had been vested in the United States, in that way. When a measure was brought before that State came into the Union. The forward, every man Would judge for himself, State afterwards came into the Union, and and he was bound to do so, not only by the there was nothing by that admission that would general principles of duty, but by the solemn go to prejudice the claim of the United States and only oath he had taken in this House. to make this road, or the claim of the State to Therefore, when gentlemen produced precedents any thing that was granted to it as a Territory of this kind, he gave notice now, he should not

Pages

About this Item

Title: Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.
Author: United States. Congress.
Canvas: Page 383
Publication: New York, [etc.]: D. Appleton and company [etc.]; 1857-61.
Subject terms: United States -- Politics and government

Technical Details

Collection: Making of America Books
Link to this Item: https://name.umdl.umich.edu/ahj4053.0008.001
Link to this scan: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/ahj4053.0008.001/385

Rights and Permissions

These pages may be freely searched and displayed. Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically. Please go to http://www.umdl.umich.edu/ for more information.

IIIF

Manifest: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/api/manifest/moa:ahj4053.0008.001

Cite this Item

Full citation: "Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856." In the digital collection Making of America Books. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/ahj4053.0008.001. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 22, 2025.

Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856.

Annotations Tools

Actions

About this Item

Technical Details

Rights and Permissions

Related Links

IIIF

Cite this Item