144 



CONGKESS, UNITED STATES. 



such a purpose does strike a blow at the Con- 

 stitution." 



Mr. Davis, of West Virginia: "How about 

 the ' general welfare ' clause ? Does not the 

 Senator think this is just in that direction ? " 



Mr. Carpenter : u 1 refer the Senator to the 

 commentaries of Judge Story, and to all writ- 

 ers upon that clause. If the general welfare 

 clause gives Congress power to do what it 

 thinks the general welfare requires, what was 

 the object of enumerating what Congress may 

 do? Upon that construction ours is an un- 

 limited government. Judge Story, Federalist 

 as he was, says that that construction would 

 carry the Government beyond all restraint, 

 because if Congress has but to say that the 

 public welfare requires a certain tiling to be 

 done, then it has the power to do it " 



Mr. Hoar, of Massachusetts: "The Senator 

 does not say that Judge Story was a Federal- 

 ist, that is, in any technical political sense? " 



Mr. Carpenter : " I do not mean that ; but 

 I mean that he was a Federalist in his con- 

 struction of the Constitution that is to say, 

 he was for construing the Constitution so as 

 to give it some power. So am I. He was for 

 construing it so as to give full play to all the 

 powers which the convention framing it and 

 the people adopting it intended and attempted 

 to confer upon the General Government, and 

 there he stopped. Discussing this question, and 

 the very clause to which the Senator from West 

 Virginia refers, he says that if that construc- 

 tion be given to that clause, then the Govern- 

 ment is an unlimited one ; that it was utterly 

 unnecessary to proceed and enumerate the 

 powers which might be exercised by the Gen- 

 eral Government." 



Mr. Saulsbury, of Delaware: "I desire to 

 ask the Senator from Wisconsin if the phrase 

 'general welfare' was not incorporated from 

 the Articles of Confederation, where it evi- 

 dently meant general interest in contradistinc- 

 tion to the local interests of the several colonies, 

 and whether it has not the same import in the 

 Constitution that it had in the Articles of Con- 

 federation ? " 



Mr. Carpenter: "Turn to the preamble of 

 the Constitution : 



" We, the people of the United States, in order to 

 form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure 

 domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, 

 promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings 

 of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and 

 establish this Constitution for the United States of 

 America. 



"Nothing can be plainer, it seems to me, 

 than that this is the true construction of that 

 clause. For the purpose of securing the ends 

 recited here, the public welfare among others, 

 this Constitution is adopted. 



" Now we proceed to see what is the Con- 

 stitution adopted. The Constitution creates 

 Congress. It then gives Congress power to do 

 all the things which they who framed this in- 

 strument b'elieved were essential to promote 



the common welfare, and so of all the other 

 ends intended to be secured and reached by 

 this preamble in the Constitution. It was a 

 mere statement of the reasons which induced 

 our fathers to create this Government, of the 

 reasons which induced them to give these cer- 

 tain enumerated powers to the General Gov- 

 ernment; but was not intended to so provide 

 the means by which these ends were to be 

 secured. That was done by the Constitution. 

 So Congress is authorized to raise money to 

 secure the common welfare in the way the 

 Constitution has adopted to secure the general 

 welfare. And in no other way. 



" Whoever construes this clause so as to say 

 that whatever will conduce to the general wel- 

 fare, Congress shall have the power to do that, 

 must do it as to all other subjects, as to every- 

 thing that will contribute to establish justice, 

 insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the 

 common defense, promote the general welfare, 

 and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves 

 and our posterity. I ask what can be con- 

 ceived of within the scope of governmental 

 powers that will not contribute, if wisely con- 

 ducted, to one or the other of these ends ? In 

 other words, if you hold the preamble of the 

 Constitution as conferring power, this Govern- 

 ment is as absolute as the Government of 

 Great Britain. We have not a republic limited 

 by the Constitution, its powers specified, and 

 their exercise regulated, but we have a Gov- 

 ernment that can do everything which it deems 

 necessary to promote justice, insure domestic 

 tranquillity, provide for the common defense, 

 promote the general welfare, etc.; and what 

 greater power has Great Britain? 



" That is the argument not of myself, but of 

 Judge Story, upon this subject, and of all the 

 men I have ever read who are regarded as 

 authority upon the Constitution in discussing 

 the effect of that clause. 



" This whole subject of the regulation of 

 health may be important, but to say that it is 

 a part of the regulation of commerce, seems to 

 me to be fanciful; it seems to be furnishing a 

 pretext for doing what we have made up our 

 mind to do and really have no power to do. 



" The thing under consideration is providing 

 for the public health, but he says this may be 

 done because it is a mere incident to commerce. 

 If you were regulating commerce in the proper 

 sense of the word, by regulating the construc- 

 tion of ships, and the conveniences they should 

 have, and all that, you would undoubtedly be 

 authorized to take into consideration the effect 

 of the construction upon the health of your 

 sailors and passengers. That would be apart, 

 a detail, an incident to the regulation of com- 

 merce in the proper sense ; but we are not 

 regulating commerce; we are not providing 

 for the building of ships ; we are not contem- 

 plating any such thing. We are contemplating 

 the single subject of human life and of health, 

 important, I concede. As I have said, perhaps 

 I might vote for an amendment to the Consti- 



