To the People of the State of New
York:
A FIFTH class of provisions in favor
of the federal authority consists of the following restrictions on the
authority of the several States:1. "No State shall enter into any treaty,
alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin
money; emit bills of credit; make any thing but gold and silver a legal
tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex-post-facto law,
or law impairing the obligation of contracts; or grant any title of nobility.
"The prohibition against treaties, alliances, and confederations makes
a part of the existing articles of Union; and for reasons which need no
explanation, is copied into the new Constitution. The prohibition of letters
of marque is another part of the old system, but is somewhat extended in
the new. According to the former, letters of marque could be granted by
the States after a declaration of war; according to the latter, these licenses
must be obtained, as well during war as previous to its declaration, from
the government of the United States. This alteration is fully justified
by the advantage of uniformity in all points which relate to foreign powers;
and of immediate responsibility to the nation in all those for whose conduct
the nation itself is to be responsible.
The right of coining money, which
is here taken from the States, was left in their hands by the Confederation,
as a concurrent right with that of Congress, under an exception in favor
of the exclusive right of Congress to regulate the alloy and value. In
this instance, also, the new provision is an improvement on the old. Whilst
the alloy and value depended on the general authority, a right of coinage
in the particular States could have no other effect than to multiply expensive
mints and diversify the forms and weights of the circulating pieces. The
latter inconveniency defeats one purpose for which the power was originally
submitted to the federal head; and as far as the former might prevent an
inconvenient remittance of gold and silver to the central mint for recoinage,
the end can be as well attained by local mints established under the general
authority.
The extension of the prohibition
to bills of credit must give pleasure to every citizen, in proportion to
his love of justice and his knowledge of the true springs of public prosperity.
The loss which America has sustained since the peace, from the pestilent
effects of paper money on the necessary confidence between man and man,
on the necessary confidence in the public councils, on the industry and
morals of the people, and on the character of republican government, constitutes
an enormous debt against the States chargeable with this unadvised measure,
which must long remain unsatisfied; or rather an accumulation of guilt,
which can be expiated no otherwise than by a voluntary sacrifice on the
altar of justice, of the power which has been the instrument of it. In
addition to these persuasive considerations, it may be observed, that the
same reasons which show the necessity of denying to the States the power
of regulating coin, prove with equal force that they ought not to be at
liberty to substitute a paper medium in the place of coin. Had every State
a right to regulate the value of its coin, there might be as many different
currencies as States, and thus the intercourse among them would be impeded;
retrospective alterations in its value might be made, and thus the citizens
of other States be injured, and animosities be kindled among the States
themselves. The subjects of foreign powers might suffer from the same cause,
and hence the Union be discredited and embroiled by the indiscretion of
a single member. No one of these mischiefs is less incident to a power
in the States to emit paper money, than to coin gold or silver. The power
to make any thing but gold and silver a tender in payment of debts, is
withdrawn from the States, on the same principle with that of issuing a
paper currency. Bills of attainder, ex-post-facto laws, and laws impairing
the obligation of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the
social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. The two former
are expressly prohibited by the declarations prefixed to some of the State
constitutions, and all of them are prohibited by the spirit and scope of
these fundamental charters. Our own experience has taught us, nevertheless,
that additional fences against these dangers ought not to be omitted. Very
properly, therefore, have the convention added this constitutional bulwark
in favor of personal security and private rights; and I am much deceived
if they have not, in so doing, as faithfully consulted the genuine sentiments
as the undoubted interests of their constituents. The sober people of America
are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils.
They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative
interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands
of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious
and lessinformed part of the community. They have seen, too, that one legislative
interference is but the first link of a long chain of repetitions, every
subsequent interference being naturally produced by the effects of the
preceding. They very rightly infer, therefore, that some thorough reform
is wanting, which will banish speculations on public measures, inspire
a general prudence and industry, and give a regular course to the business
of society. The prohibition with respect to titles of nobility is copied
from the articles of Confederation and needs no comment. 2. "No State shall,
without the consent of the Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports
or exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection
laws, and the net produce of all duties and imposts laid by any State on
imports or exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United
States; and all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control
of the Congress. No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any
duty on tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into
any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power, or
engage in war unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will
not admit of delay. "The restraint on the power of the States over imports
and exports is enforced by all the arguments which prove the necessity
of submitting the regulation of trade to the federal councils. It is needless,
therefore, to remark further on this head, than that the manner in which
the restraint is qualified seems well calculated at once to secure to the
States a reasonable discretion in providing for the conveniency of their
imports and exports, and to the United States a reasonable check against
the abuse of this discretion.
The remaining particulars of this
clause fall within reasonings which are either so obvious, or have been
so fully developed, that they may be passed over without remark. The SIXTH
and last class consists of the several powers and provisions by which efficacy
is given to all the rest. 1. Of these the first is, the "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. "Few parts of the Constitution have been assailed with more intemperance
than this; yet on a fair investigation of it, no part can appear more completely
invulnerable. Without the SUBSTANCE of this power, the whole Constitution
would be a dead letter. Those who object to the article, therefore, as
a part of the Constitution, can only mean that the FORM of the provision
is improper. But have they considered whether a better form could have
been substituted? There are four other possible methods which the Constitution
might have taken on this subject. They might have copied the second article
of the existing Confederation, which would have prohibited the exercise
of any power not EXPRESSLY delegated; they might have attempted a positive
enumeration of the powers comprehended under the general terms "necessary
and proper"; they might have attempted a negative enumeration of them,
by specifying the powers excepted from the general definition; they might
have been altogether silent on the subject, leaving these necessary and
proper powers to construction and inference. Had the convention taken the
first method of adopting the second article of Confederation, it is evident
that the new Congress would be continually exposed, as their predecessors
have been, to the alternative of construing the term "EXPRESSLY" with so
much rigor, as to disarm the government of all real authority whatever,
or with so much latitude as to destroy altogether the force of the restriction.
It would be easy to show, if it were
necessary, that no important power, delegated by the articles of Confederation,
has been or can be executed by Congress, without recurring more or less
to the doctrine of CONSTRUCTION or IMPLICATION. As the powers delegated
under the new system are more extensive, the government which is to administer
it would find itself still more distressed with the alternative of betraying
the public interests by doing nothing, or of violating the Constitution
by exercising powers indispensably necessary and proper, but, at the same
time, not EXPRESSLY granted. Had the convention attempted a positive enumeration
of the powers necessary and proper for carrying their other powers into
effect, the attempt would have involved a complete digest of laws on every
subject to which the Constitution relates; accommodated too, not only to
the existing state of things, but to all the possible changes which futurity
may produce; for in every new application of a general power, the PARTICULAR
POWERS, which are the means of attaining the OBJECT of the general power,
must always necessarily vary with that object, and be often properly varied
whilst the object remains the same.
Had they attempted to enumerate the
particular powers or means not necessary or proper for carrying the general
powers into execution, the task would have been no less chimerical; and
would have been liable to this further objection, that every defect in
the enumeration would have been equivalent to a positive grant of authority.
If, to avoid this consequence, they had attempted a partial enumeration
of the exceptions, and described the residue by the general terms, NOT
NECESSARY OR PROPER, it must have happened that the enumeration would comprehend
a few of the excepted powers only; that these would be such as would be
least likely to be assumed or tolerated, because the enumeration would
of course select such as would be least necessary or proper; and that the
unnecessary and improper powers included in the residuum, would be less
forcibly excepted, than if no partial enumeration had been made. Had the
Constitution been silent on this head, there can be no doubt that all the
particular powers requisite as means of executing the general powers would
have resulted to the government, by unavoidable implication. No axiom is
more clearly established in law, or in reason, than that wherever the end
is required, the means are authorized; wherever a general power to do a
thing is given, every particular power necessary for doing it is included.
Had this last method, therefore, been pursued by the convention, every
objection now urged against their plan would remain in all its plausibility;
and the real inconveniency would be incurred of not removing a pretext
which may be seized on critical occasions for drawing into question the
essential powers of the Union. If it be asked what is to be the consequence,
in case the Congress shall misconstrue this part of the Constitution, and
exercise powers not warranted by its true meaning, I answer, the same as
if they should misconstrue or enlarge any other power vested in them; as
if the general power had been reduced to particulars, and any one of these
were to be violated; the same, in short, as if the State legislatures should
violate the irrespective constitutional authorities. In the first instance,
the success of the usurpation will depend on the executive and judiciary
departments, which are to expound and give effect to the legislative acts;
and in the last resort a remedy must be obtained from the people who can,
by the election of more faithful representatives, annul the acts of the
usurpers. The truth is, that this ultimate redress may be more confided
in against unconstitutional acts of the federal than of the State legislatures,
for this plain reason, that as every such act of the former will be an
invasion of the rights of the latter, these will be ever ready to mark
the innovation, to sound the alarm to the people, and to exert their local
influence in effecting a change of federal representatives. There being
no such intermediate body between the State legislatures and the people
interested in watching the conduct of the former, violations of the State
constitutions are more likely to remain unnoticed and unredressed. 2. "This
Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance
thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority
of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges
in every State shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or
laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. "The indiscreet zeal
of the adversaries to the Constitution has betrayed them into an attack
on this part of it also, without which it would have been evidently and
radically defective. To be fully sensible of this, we need only suppose
for a moment that the supremacy of the State constitutions had been left
complete by a saving clause in their favor. In the first place, as these
constitutions invest the State legislatures with absolute sovereignty,
in all cases not excepted by the existing articles of Confederation, all
the authorities contained in the proposed Constitution, so far as they
exceed those enumerated in the Confederation, would have been annulled,
and the new Congress would have been reduced to the same impotent condition
with their predecessors. In the next place, as the constitutions of some
of the States do not even expressly and fully recognize the existing powers
of the Confederacy, an express saving of the supremacy of the former would,
in such States, have brought into question every power contained in the
proposed Constitution. In the third place, as the constitutions of the
States differ much from each other, it might happen that a treaty or national
law, of great and equal importance to the States, would interfere with
some and not with other constitutions, and would consequently be valid
in some of the States, at the same time that it would have no effect in
others. In fine, the world would have seen, for the first time, a system
of government founded on an inversion of the fundamental principles of
all government; it would have seen the authority of the whole society every
where subordinate to the authority of the parts; it would have seen a monster,
in which the head was under the direction of the members. 3. "The Senators
and Representatives, and the members of the several State legislatures,
and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and
the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this
Constitution. "It has been asked why it was thought necessary, that the
State magistracy should be bound to support the federal Constitution, and
unnecessary that a like oath should be imposed on the officers of the United
States, in favor of the State constitutions. Several reasons might be assigned
for the distinction. I content myself with one, which is obvious and conclusive.
The members of the federal government will have no agency in carrying the
State constitutions into effect. The members and officers of the State
governments, on the contrary, will have an essential agency in giving effect
to the federal Constitution. The election of the President and Senate will
depend, in all cases, on the legislatures of the several States. And the
election of the House of Representatives will equally depend on the same
authority in the first instance; and will, probably, forever be conducted
by the officers, and according to the laws, of the States. 4. Among the
provisions for giving efficacy to the federal powers might be added those
which belong to the executive and judiciary departments: but as these are
reserved for particular examination in another place, I pass them over
in this. We have now reviewed, in detail, all the articles composing the
sum or quantity of power delegated by the proposed Constitution to the
federal government, and are brought to this undeniable conclusion, that
no part of the power is unnecessary or improper for accomplishing the necessary
objects of the Union. The question, therefore, whether this amount of power
shall be granted or not, resolves itself into another question, whether
or not a government commensurate to the exigencies of the Union shall be
established; or, in other words, whether the Union itself shall be preserved.
PUBLIUS. |