MR. MONROE'S OBJECTIONS
to
"AN ACT FOR THE PRESERVATION AND REPAIR OF THE CUMBERLAND ROAD."
Having duly considered the bill, entitled "An Act for the Preservation and Repair of the Cumberland Road," it is with deep regret, approving as I do the policy, that I am compelled to object to its passage, and to return it to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, under a conviction that Congress do not possess the power, under the Constitution, to pass such a law.
A power to establish turnpikes with gates and tolls, and to enforce the collection of tolls by penalties, implies a power to adopt and execute a system of internal improvement. A right to impose duties, to be paid by all persons passing a certain road, and on horses and carriages, as is done by this bill, involves the right to take land from the proprietor, on a valuation, and to pass laws for the protection of the road from injuries; and if it exist as to one road, it exists as to any other, and to as many roads as Congress may think proper to establish. A right to legislate for one of these purposes, is a right to legislate for the others. It is a complete right of jurisdiction and sovereignty, for all the purposes of internal improvement, and not merely the right of appropriating money, under the power vested in Congress to make appropriations,—under which power, with the consent of the states through which the road passes, the work was originally commenced, and has been so far executed. I am of opinion that Congress do not possess this power; that the states, individually, cannot grant it; for, although they may assent to the appropriation of money within their limits for such purposes, they can grant no power of jurisdiction or sovereignty by special compacts with the United States. This power can be granted only by an amendment to the Constitution, and in the mode prescribed by it.
If the power exist, it must, either because it has been specifically granted to the United States, or that which is incidental to some power which has been specifically granted. If we examine the specific grants of power, we do not find it among them nor is it incidental to any power which has been specifically granted.
It never has been contended that the power was specifically granted. It is claimed only as being incidental to one or more of the powers which are specifically granted. The following are the powers from which it is said to be derived:—
1st, from the right to establish post-offices and post-roads; 2d, from the right to declare war; 3d, to regulate commerce; 4th, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare; 5th, from the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution all the powers vested by the Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof; 6th, and lastly, from the power to dispose of, and make all needful rules and regulations respecting, the territory and other property of the United States.
According to my judgment, it cannot be derived from either of those powers, nor from all of them united; and, in consequence, does not exist. * * *
JAMES MONROE.
Washington, May 4, 1822.
On the evening of the 24th, President Monroe also transmitted his "views," in support of his veto, in an elaborate argument, which is the exposition quoted in President Jackson's objections.
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Rule_Segment_-_Span_-_50px.svg/50px-Rule_Segment_-_Span_-_50px.svg.png)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/Rule_Segment_-_Diamond_-_6px.svg/7px-Rule_Segment_-_Diamond_-_6px.svg.png)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/Rule_Segment_-_Span_-_50px.svg/50px-Rule_Segment_-_Span_-_50px.svg.png)
OBJECTIONS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
ON RETURNING TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THE ENROLLED BILL, ENTITLED
"AN ACT AUTHORIZING A SUBSCRIPTION OF STOCK IN THE MAYSVILLE, WASHINGTON, PARIS, AND LEXINGTON TURNPIKE ROAD COMPANY."
The constitutional power of the federal government to construct or promote works of internal improvement presents itself in two points of view—the first, as bearing upon the sovereignty of the states within whose limits their execution is contemplated,