149 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



meoU extend they will be more numerous. It 

 will IK- v-ry difficult to draw any line of dis- 

 tinction between a calamity by fire or by a 

 tornado or by an earthquake or by a great 

 flood. I do not nee bow any distinction can be 

 drawn; and if Congress U to intervene with 

 relief in every case in which any community, 

 however large or however small, in the (treat 

 extent of territory belonging to the t'nited 

 States, shall be a sufferer, I do not know where 

 will be the end of our benevolence, the exam- 

 ple being once fully set. 



>w, it does seem to me that, before any 

 more precedents are built up on this subject, 

 this mutter should receive a careful legal con- 

 sideration ; and I hope, therefore, that the 

 Senators who favor this bill will consent to 

 the motion I am about to submit, and that is 

 that the bill be referred to the Committee on 

 the Judiciary for report." 



Mr. Trnmbull, of Illinois, said: " Mr. Presi- 

 dent, having voted for the bill for the relief of 

 Chicago, 1 shall vote for this bill. This consti- 

 tutional argument, as it U called, was started 

 then, first undi-r one clause of the Constitution 

 and then under another. Congress decided 

 that it had authority to pass the bill, and of 

 course that the Constitution was not violated 

 in its passage. And although the Senator from 

 Wisconsin (Mr. Carpenter) speaks with very 

 great confidence that this is a palpable and 

 clear violation of the Constitution, and the 

 Senator from Ohio (Mr. Thurmnn) seems to 

 have great doubts about it, for ray own part I 

 cannot sec what clause of the Constitution is 

 to be violated by the passage of the hill. 



" Kut. then, what is the bill! The bill pro- 

 vides that plate-glass, if yon please, or other 

 articles going into the construction of certain 

 buildings in a certain locality, shall have a 

 drawback of the amount of duty that is paid. 

 Is that a new provision in this country? Why, 

 sir, from the beginning we have had a draw- 

 bark upon salt, and the Constitution is not 

 violated, because when salt is imported into 

 t!ii- country the same duty is collected npon 

 it whether at New Orleans or at Boston ; hut 

 in case that salt is used in the curing of fish, 

 then there i* a remission of the amount or a 

 drawback of the amount that has been paid." 



Mr. Cnrpcntcr, of Wisconsin, said: "I do 

 n<>t rlniui that this hill violates the provision of 

 the Constitution to which the Senator last refers 

 about ports; but here is a provision that 'all 

 duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform 

 thruflkhnut the Tinted States.' It is well known 

 thatThi- object of thnt provision was to put 

 all the States on the same footing. It was seen 

 at once that without *nch a provision the 

 Western Stntes would have to pay tribute to 

 New York ami other seaboard States. The 

 latter might levy such excessive rotes of 

 dntidi as to dmtroy the commerce of the 

 Went. It was inserted, therefore, to put 

 all State* on the same footing. It is not that 

 it shall bear uniformly upon all the people 



of the United States, but it shall tic uni- 

 form throughout the United States; that is, 

 territorially. 



Now, I desire to put this question : suppose 

 a law should be passed by Congress thnt every 

 raan who was engaged in manufacturing in the 

 State of Massachusetts for the neit five yenrs 

 should have a drawback upon all an 

 which he imported, and which should be man- 

 ufactured in the State of Massachusetts, what 

 would be the effect of such a provision! To 

 hurry all the manufacturers of the l'iii< n 

 into Massachusetts. That is one of the very 

 things which this section of the Constitution 

 was designed to prevent. Uniformity through- 

 out the United States would prevent one State 

 building itself up by legislation which applied 

 only to that State. Hut if the Senator's 

 theory is a sound one, if such a bill is consti- 

 tutional because all the people of the United 

 States may go to Boston and have the bemtit 

 of it, then "Congress might to-morrow establish 

 a monopoly in the manufacturing business of 

 any article in any State by providing thnt every 

 man who should import a raw material to 1 o 

 manufactured in that State should have a 

 drawback. That is tho very thing, or at least 

 one of the important things, which this pro- 

 vision of the Constitution was intended to pre- 

 vent." 



Mr. Morton, of Indiana, said: "Mr. Presi- 

 dent, tho questions presented are not so clear 

 ns the Senator from Illinois would intimate. 

 How a distinction can be made between tho 

 case where a law imposing a duty would 

 except from its operation such articles as are 

 to be used, for example, in the city of Boston, 

 or, failing to make that exception, should 

 contain a provision that on such nrticles as 

 are used in the city of Boston a drawback 

 shall be allowed, I cannot very well under- 

 stand. The Senator from Illinois says there 

 is a difference; but is it not a difference in 

 name instead of in principle? To except from 

 the operation of tho tariff law the goods con- 

 sumed in Boston, or to give a drawback for 

 the goods consumed in Boston, it seems to 

 me is pretty much tho same thing. If the 

 object of the Constitution is to put the peo- 

 ple of tho United States on tho same looting 

 and treat all alike, is not the purpose violated 

 as effectually whether you except tlie people 

 of Boston from tho operation of the law in 

 the first place, or give them a drawback for 

 all they have paid ? " 



Mr. Bayard, of Delaware said : "Mr. Presi- 

 dent, the present bill proposes, under the 

 method of a drawback of dnty, to enable n 

 special class, and n very limited class of 

 owners in one of tho cities of one of the St:it< s 

 of this Union, to import materials to be IIM<! 

 in the construction and improvement of their 

 property at a less rate than other citizens 

 even in that citv may do, and certainly l,--s 

 than others can do in other parts of the coun- 

 try. It confines the importation of these 



