CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



145 



tution which would confer the power, but I 

 deny most respectfully that it is conferred. I 

 deny that any man who is supporting the Con- 

 stitution can vote for an appropriation in aid of 

 any subject, no matter how important and 

 generally useful, that is not committed to the 

 jurisdiction of the General Government." 



Mr. Garland: "Mr. President, the objec- 

 tions urged by the Senator from Wisconsin 

 have been urged before, and a great many 

 more. Some two years ago, when a simi- 

 lar question was up, everything that is said 

 by him to-day and much more was said. He 

 was not here at the time, I believe, to partici- 

 pate in that argument. The question was 

 argued by a number of Senators on both sides 

 for and against the general proposition, and 

 every case was referred to and commented 

 upon, from Gibbons vs. Ogden, in 9 "Wheaton, 

 down to the celebrated cattle case in 5 Wal- 

 lace, on the subject of commerce between the 

 States. The general power to take care of the 

 health of the country was put upon three dif- 

 ferent clauses of the Constitution, one of which 

 the Senator from Wisconsin has not referred 

 to : first, the commercial clause, which was 

 referred to by the Senator from Tennessee; 

 second, the general-welfare clause ; but clause 

 No. 2 of section 10 of Article I was also re- 

 ferred to and commented upon to some extent 

 by myself, and I was supported in that by 

 Judge Story, the authority that has been re- 

 ferred to by the Senator from Wisconsin. That 

 clause is as follows: 



" No State shall, without the consent of the Con- 

 gress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, 

 except what may be absolutely necessary for execut- 

 ing its inspection laws ; and the net produce of all 

 duties and imposts, laid by any State on imports or 

 exports, shall DC 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. 



"Judge Story said in the second volume of 

 his ' Commentaries ' on the Constitution that 

 there was ample authority for the exercise of 

 this power. It is now late in the day to urge 

 an objection of that character. We have had 

 sanitary regulations or a quarantine law, so to 

 speak, ever since 1790 upon the statute-book 

 of the country. In 1879 that statute was con- 

 siderably enlarged by the Congress of the 

 United States by an act entitled 'An act to 

 prevent the introduction of contagious or in- 

 fectious diseases into the United States.' That 

 act was passed April 29, 1879. The following 

 year that statute was considerably enlarged by 

 a general health bill, which was reported from 

 the special committee by the Senator from 

 Tennessee, and which received the sanction of 

 the two Houses of Congress with some amend- 

 ments. On the 14th of May last Congress 

 passed the following joint resolution : 



" That the President of the United States is hereby 

 authorized to call an international sanitary conference 

 to meet at Washington, District of Columbia, to which 

 the several powers having jurisdiction of ports likely 

 to bo infected with yellow fever or cholera shall be 

 invited to send delegates, properly authorized, for the 

 VOL. xxi. 10 A 



purpose of securing an international system of noti- 

 fication as to the actual sanitary condition of ports 

 and places under the jurisdiction of such powers and 

 of vessels sailing therefrom. 



"As I understand, in pursuance of that joint 

 resolution this conference was invited, and in 

 pursuance of that invitation the conference has 

 met. 



" It is now in session in the city of Wash- 

 ington. Now the question comes up, Shall we 

 simply discharge an obligation upon us to meet 

 the exigencies of this conference, which we 

 have solemnly invited by three laws, and the 

 constitutionality of every one of which was 

 discussed, if I may be permitted to use such an 

 expression, ad nauseam? The question now 

 is, Shall we defray the expenses of that sani- 

 tary conference that we have invited to meet 

 here ? I do not see that at this day there is 

 any argument left in respect to that matter." 



Mr. Carpenter : " That is not the question I 

 put. The question I put was whether the 

 Constitution authorizes us to do it?" 



Mr. Garland: "I think it does." 



Mr. Carpenter : " Then I do not see that the 

 other is the question. I agree with the Sen- 

 ator that if we ask a man to work for us, if 

 we can pay him we ought to do it ; but the 

 question with me was, Where do we get the 

 authority to do this? We are not giving our 

 own money to pay these men. That would be 

 very proper, and I should be very willing to 

 contribute half of all I have got (and I should 

 not be out more than the price of a cigar at 

 that), but the question is whether I have got 

 any right to vote the money of the people of 

 New York for such a purpose." 



The joint resolution was reported to the 

 Senate without amendment, ordered to a third 

 reading, and read the third time. 



The roll-call having been concluded, the re- 

 sult was announced as follows: 



TEAS Allison, Anthony, Beck, Booth, Burnside, 

 Call, Coke, Davis of West Virginia, Dawes, Ferry, 

 Garland, Groome, Hampton, Harris, Hoar, Johnston, 

 Jonas, McMillan, Morgan, Morrill, Platt, Pugh, Ran- 

 dolph, Eollins, Slater, Voorhees, Wallace, Whyte, 

 Williams, Windom 30. 



NAYS Brown, Carpenter, Cockrell, Farley, Ingalls, 

 McPherson, Pendletoh. Plumb, Saulsbury, "Saunders, 

 Teller 11. 



ABSENT Bailey, Baldwin, Bayard, Elaine, Blair, 

 Bruce, Butler, Cameron of Pennsylvania, Cameron of 

 Wisconsin, Conkling, Davis of Illinois, Eaton, Ed- 

 munds, Grover, Hamlin, Hereford, Hill of Colorado, 

 Hill of Georgia, Jones of Florida, Jones of Nevada, 

 Kellosrg, Kernan, Kirk wood, Lamar, Logan, McDon- 

 ald, Maxey, Paddock-Ransom, Sharon, Thurman, 

 Vance, Vest, Walker, Withers 35. 



So the joint resolution was passed. 



In the House of Representatives, on January 

 28th, the following bill was considered: 



Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Reprettnt- 

 ntirt* of tJte United States of America in Congretta*- 

 semklecl, That the Secretary of the Treasury be and 

 he is hereby authorized and directed to pay, out of 

 any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropri- 

 ate'd, to Mrs. Elizabeth P. Page, widow of the lato 



