CONGRESS, U. S. 



323 



entitled to consideration, that money is one of 

 the great instruments of commerce as much so 

 as the ship and that the power to regulate the 

 principal thing is the power to regulate its in- 

 strumentalities. I confess that at first this 

 view of the question deeply impressed me. 

 But further reflection has satisfied me it is not 

 sound. If the Constitution were otherwise 

 silent upon the subject, the implication would 

 doubtless be a strong one. 



" But the Constitution has spoken, has in- 

 dicated what shall be moneyunder its provis- 

 ions, and the power of Congress over it. 



;> Again : the practical construction of the 

 Constitution has been that no such power ex- 

 isted. Though the exigencies of the Govern- 

 ment have heretofore been great, the experi- 

 ment has never been tried, nor, so far as I 

 know, ever before suggested.'' 



Mr. Edwards, of Xew Hampshire, in reply, 

 said : ' ~\Vhy. sir, where is the express authority 

 for the legislation to seize upon an illustration 

 nearest to us under which this Capitol and 

 all the spacious and durable public buildings 

 around us have been provided for the uses of 

 the Government ; where is the express power 

 for most of tbe details of all the Departments 

 of the Government, for all the interests and 

 security of commerce, for all the organization 

 of your army and navy ; not to extend this 

 summary, where, sir, is the express power for 

 doing that in which now this whole House un- 

 hesitatingly concurs, in the very bills before 

 us ? Nowhere in the Constitution. The emis- 

 sion of bills of credit, which these notes are, is 

 nowhere named except as associated with the 

 provision to make them a lawful tender, and to 

 prohibit the States from doing either ; and yet 

 the power to emit bills of credit, when the ne- 

 cessity for its exercise arose in the war of 1812, 

 found its recognition as a constitutional power, 

 and has been acted npon as such at various 

 periods without question. 



" So, sir, the power which is now attempted 

 to be exercised and to be deduced from the 

 express powers granted would, in my belief, 

 have found, as have other latent powers, a 

 clear recognition, if the imperative necessity 

 which is now upon us had ever earlier oc- 

 curred." 



Mr. Blake, of Ohio, urged that the legal ten- 

 der clause was constitutional because it was ne- 

 cessary, saying : We say it is necessary to make 

 Treasury notes a legal tender, and by it we in- 

 tend to be understood to mean that the in- 

 terests of the Government and the people re- 

 quire that it should be done. It is just in this 

 sense the word necessary is used in the Con- 

 stitution." 



Mr. Campbell, of Pennsylvania, also believed 

 the necessity of the case secured its constitu- 

 tionality. He said: i; I humbly conceive my duty 

 to be a plain one. The path I have marked out for 

 myself I will follow, let it lead where it may. 

 Whatever measure is now or hereafter may be- 

 come necessary to adopt in order to maintain the 



Union and perpetuate free government, that will 

 I support. Speak not to me of 'objections' 

 and ' scruples ' and ' dangers,' of ' constitutional 

 objections ' and ' conservative influences.' Soph- 

 istry is ever plausible, and opposition to a just 

 and necessary measure generally wears the 

 mask of a ' constitutional objection.' The high- 

 est duty of every member is to maintain the 

 Union to sustain the Constitution against this 

 causeless and wicked rebellion ; and in doing 

 this, let us bear in mind that the Constitution 

 was made for the people to secure to them 

 and their posterity the blessings of free gov- 

 ernment. Therefore with me the primary in- 

 quiry is, Is this measure necessary to suppress 

 the rebellion ? If it is, here am I ready to sus- 

 tain it. It will he found the Constitution gives 

 ample power to sustain this view." 



Mr. Stevens, of Pennsylvania, thus examined 

 the constitutional objections: "Having, as I 

 think, shown the impossibility of carrying on 

 the Government in any other way, let us briefly 

 notice some of the objections to it. First, is it 

 constitutional ? 



" The power to emit bills of credit and make 

 them a legal tender is nowhere expressly given 

 in the Constitution ; but it is known that but 

 few of the acts which Government can perform 

 are specified in that instrument. It would re- 

 quire a volume larger than the Pandects of Jus- 

 tinian or the Code of Napoleon to make such 

 enumeration, whereas our Constitution has but 

 a few pages. But everything necessary to car- 

 ry out the granted powers of the Government 

 is not only implied but expressly given to Con- 

 gress. If nothing could be done by Congress 

 except what is enumerated in the Constitution, 

 the Government could not live a week. 



" The States are prohibited from making any- 

 thing but 'gold and silver coin a tender in the 

 payment of debts ; ' but such prohibition does 

 not extend to Congress. The Constitution is 

 silent as to the power of Congress over that 

 subject. The whole question of the right to 

 emit bills of credit by Congress was considered 

 in the convention that framed the Constitution. 

 It was reported as a part of the power ' to bor- 

 row money.' It was objected to as tending to 

 make paper a currency with legal tender, and a 

 motion was made to strike it out and insert an 

 express prohibition. That was resisted, because, 

 as Mr. Mason said, ' it could not be foreseen 

 what the necessities of the Government might 

 at some time require. 1 ' 'The late war,' he 

 said, ' could not have been carried on had such 

 prohibition existed.' It was finally agreed to 

 strike out the express power, and not to insert 

 the prohibition, leaving it to the exigencies of 

 the times to determine its necessity. The right 

 to emit bills of credit, which the convention 

 expressly refused to grant as a substantive pow- 

 er, has for fifty years, by the common consent 

 of the nation, been practised, and is now con- 

 ceded by every opponent of this bill. With 

 what grace can the concomitant power to make 

 them a legal tender be objected to? The Su- 



