1838] 



FARMERS' REGISTER. 



701 



over 200,000 souls. This would triple the surlace 

 of our towns, and more than quadruple the actual 

 value of the lands therein. Hiiildiuirs which are 

 now heiii^ erected in oiher stales upon the profits 

 oT our husiness would start with uiaLMC enterprise 

 Avith us ; and the money paid lor their materials 

 and const ruction would remain the property of 

 our citizens, l^ands in the vicinity ol' our towns 

 would enhance in value, liir lumber and fuel, while 

 Hirriculture would find a new stimulus in turnishing 

 productions to those who noiv subsist wholly at 

 our expense, and to the profit of others. 



Iftimc would permit, your committee would at- 

 tempt to demonstrate that the consumption of the 

 stale of Virginia, of commmodities, the produce 

 and manufiicture of which is foreign to her juris- 

 diction, is as great as that of the whole United 

 States was, so lately as the year 1790 ; and will 

 leave to this convention and to history to answer, 

 whether the trade ofthese United States was con- 

 sidered of such importance as to induce national 

 efforts (which have been successful) to enable the 

 United States as a whole to enjoy equal and reci- 

 procal commerce ; and to inquire, is not an amount 

 of trade which was worthy of the concerted action 

 of the United States in 1790, at least worthy of a 

 united and patriotic effort of the people of Virgi- 

 nia in 1838 ? 



Your committee assume that the mercantile 

 profits of export commerce from the state of Vir- 

 ginia is about one-eighth of ihe profit of the im- 

 port, including with the import however the fur- 

 nishing all the varied supplies for the interior. 

 Were we therefore to export our whole produc- 

 tions and furnish at first hands none of our sup- 

 plies, we should enjoy but one-ninth part of tjie 

 profits of our business. If this position be cor- 

 rect, it behooves us to place ourselves in the pos- 

 session of the business of furnishing the tide-wa- 

 ter region of our state before we mature large 

 schemes of internal improvement, to confer more 

 trade at our cost on our rivals wliom we now see 

 possessed of that which nature designed for us, 

 and of which we can only re-possess ourselves 

 through that reserved sovereignty, which it is our 

 right Jo exercise by a legal regulation of our inter- 

 nal police. 



Your committee find that the evils of an indi- 

 rect trade are not exclusively lelt by the states of 

 Virginia and North Carolina, but by many other 

 states; and when they look at its result, and ob- 

 serve that it is verging towards a commercial con- 

 solidation of the whole pecuniary energies of this 

 great confederacy in a single city, they cannot 

 contemplate our condition, but with dismay ; more 

 especially when we consider that we pay our ri- 

 vals one hundred dollars for what costs them 

 about seventy dollars on the average of our trans- 

 actions ; and this is the boon which we obtain in 

 going from home, not to buy supplies, but to buy 

 <"redit in obtaining them. 



On reference to' the history of trade in the old 

 world, and of its concentration, your committee 

 are constrained to adopt the opinion, that it is not, 

 nor has it ever been, absolutely free. It has, in- 

 deed, ever been subject to legal direction in all 

 civilized societies, and in those not civilized there 

 is but little or no trade to receive the fostering aid 

 and protection of legislation. All the states of 

 the old world have at least one point of commer- 

 cial monopoly ; and it is admitted by political eco- 

 nomists, that the trade of an empire will find a 



point of supremacy within itself for all its la/gc 

 business; and that the smaller trade will, and 

 should be subordinate to such concentration, which 

 is the effect of legislative provision. 



This result must be expected under any conso- 

 lidated government, and it is evident that the trade 

 is subordinate to law, or the seals of business in 

 each nation would not, in all cases, be within 

 herself. 



It is urged by many, however, that under our 

 federal system, we must submit to what they call 

 the " inevitable law of trade," which they say is 

 that of consolidation o( all commerce at a single 

 point ; and such has been the perpetual tendency 

 of ihe business of the United States for the last 

 forty years. It is also admitted, that this may 

 have been the result of governmental action ; but 

 if it be so, it has not been by the design of those 

 who have administered our affairs, but the fault of 

 the people of the stales, who have permitted this 

 concentration. It must be observed, that our go- 

 vernment is not one of consolidation, inasmuch as 

 the federal government regulates all foreign busi- 

 ness, whilst that of each state may regulate its 

 internal concerns as its wisdom may direct. It 

 does not, therefore, appear to your committee, that 

 the trade of the United States will necessarily re- 

 main consolidated any longer than those accjuiesce 

 in such a state of things, who are impoverished 

 by its consequences. That there is abundant 

 power over this subject, reserved to each state, is 

 evident on reference to the fundamental principles 

 of our orovernmenf, and to the causes which led 

 to the formation of the constitution of the United 

 States. 



That your committee may be sustained in the 

 premises, ihey present herewith the opinion of 

 that eminent jurist, James Kent, formerly chan- 

 cellor of the state of New York, which they trust 

 will be .-eceived as good authority, sanctioned, as 

 it is, in its doctrines, by the decisions by Chief 

 Justice Marshall, in the case of Brown vs. The 

 State of Maryland, and Gibbons vs. Ogden. 



" CHANCELLOR KENt's OPINION. 



Questions. 



1. Is the law of the legislature of Massachu- 

 setts, passed the 19th of April, 1838, and entitled 

 " an act to regulate the sale of spirituous liquors, 

 constitutional, and consistent with the revenue 

 laws of the United States'? 



2. In what manner can a violation of the li- 

 cense laws of Massachusetts be carried into the 

 supreme court of the United States 1 



These two questions have been submitted to 

 me, as counsel, for my opinion thereon, by a gen- 

 tleman of the city of Boston, who considers him- 

 self interested in the inquiry. 



Opinion. 



1. The act alluded to, declares, that "no h'- 

 censed innholder, retailer, common victualler or 

 other person, except licensed apothecaries, physi- 

 cians and others, who may sell spirituous liquors 

 to be used in the arts, or lor medical purposes 

 only, shall sell any brandy, rum, or other spiritu- 

 ous liquors, or any mixed liquor, part of which is 

 spirituous, in a less quantity than fifteen gallons, 

 and that to be delivered and carried away all at 

 one time, under a penalty, from .$10 to ^20 for 

 each offence." 



The former statute in relation to this subject, of 



