Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol II).djvu/406

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
398
CONSTITUTION OF THE U. STATES.
[BOOK III.

of inquiry, what were the reasons, for which this power was given, and what were the objections, to which it was deemed liable.


    case of the old bank of North America might be cited, as a memorable one. The incorporating ordinance grew out of the inferred necessity of such an institution to carry on the war, by aiding the finances, which were starving under the neglect or inability of the states to furnish their assessed quotas. Congress was at the time so much aware of the deficient authority, that they recommended it to the state legislatures to pass laws giving due effect to the ordinance, which was done by Pennsylvania and several other states.
    "Mr. Wilson, justly distinguished for his intellectual powers, being deeply impressed with the importance of a bank at such a crisis, published a small pamphlet, entitled 'Considerations on the Bank of North America,' in which he endeavoured to derive the power from the nature of the Union, in which the colonies were declared and became independent states; and also from the tenour of the 'articles of confederation' themselves. But what is particularly worthy of notice is, that with all his anxious search in those articles for such a power, he never glanced at the terms, 'common defence and general welfare,' as a source of it. He rather chose to rest the claim on a recital in the text, 'that for the more convenient management of the general interests of the United States, delegates shall be annually appointed to meet in congress,' which he said implied, that the United States had general rights, general powers, and general obligations, not derived from any particular state, nor from all the particular states, taken separately, but 'resulting from the union of the whole;' these general powers, not being controlled by the article declaring, that each state retained all powers not granted by the articles, because 'the individual states never possessed, and could not retain, a general power over the others.'
    "The authority and argument here resorted to, if proving the ingenuity and patriotic anxiety of the author, on one hand, show sufficiently on the other, that the terms, 'common defence and general welfare,' could not, according to the known acceptation of them, avail his object.
    "That the terms in question were not suspected in the convention, which formed the constitution, of any such meaning, as has been constructively applied to them; may be pronounced with entire confidence. For it exceeds the possibility of belief, that the known advocates in the convention for a jealous grant, and cautious definition of federal powers, should have silently permitted the introduction of words or phrases, in a sense rendering fruitless the restrictions and definitions elaborated by them.
    "Consider, for a moment, the immeasurable difference between the constitution, limited in its powers to the enumerated objects; and ex-