Relief Of Boston Sufferers

The uiajurity of tho Senate Committoe on Judioiary, iu reporting ndversely on tho House biil for tho relief ot' suflerers by the Boston lire, submit a long argument to show that, in view of the expresa constitutioual provisión securing to all States equal privileges and advantagos iu coJnmerce anti manufactures, Congress has no power to pass the bill. In reply to the argument that preoedents support this bill, ït is aaswered that the C jnsütution ia an abiding command, and that nineteen violations of it will nut justit'y a tweutieth, and that, rnoreover such bilis oí this oharaetei as have been passed heretofore were not seriously opposed, or fully considered with regala to conatitutional questions. The Portland relief was passed without debate, and seeming ly without ouneideration. The Chicago relief was reported by the Senate Committee on Finance, but w.is not considered by the Judiciary Couunitte, and it is said to be fair to presume that the sympathy of Senators lor the sufferera in that unheralded oalamity contributed more to the passage of the bill than to the deliberate judgiaent of the Senate upon aconstitunonal queöticn. The commiltee continuo as follows: " The impertanco of tho subject and fact that a oalamity of iira canuot bo distinguished from o&e pvoduccd by flood, Unrnoane, earthquake, or any other visitation outside tüe ordinary course of things, aud the fact that, if Congress attonipts to insure against o-no, it must againat all, not only justihts, but calis fora reconsideration oi' the subject, and makes it necessury to determine the principie to be apphed iu all such cases lf in view of all these considerationa, Congress shall pass the bill, it iu not perceived by your comuiittee upon what ground Congress oould refuse relief to individual sutforers. How ruany buildings must be destroyed to justity the interterence of Congress 'Í Must there be 1,000, or 500, or 150, or 50, or five ? V hore is the lina to be drawu i Must not Congress becoino the great almoner of of the Nation - a great insurauce company lor 40,000.000 of people 'i " After arguing that this bilLc.innot be regarded as substantially a draw back of duties for the rcasons that the bill relates to artiules to be used ia this country, aaddraw backs like duties must be uniform throughout the country, the comniittt'e continue: " If it be said that the bill is in effect but a mere appropriation of money out of the treasury, that Congress has the power of appropriation liinited only by the fact that tho appropriation must be made to pay its debts and to próvido for coinmon dfci'ense and the gtneral welfare of the United States, tho answer is plain, that the bill does not provide for paying any debt or for anything necessary for the cominon wollare or coiuuion defeuse, nor is it an appiopriation for the general welfare. It is a local measure." ïhey quote from Story's Commentaries on tho Constitution to show that a power to levy taxes for the couimou defense a-nd general welfare is not in the common senne a general power, but lïmited to those objects, and eonolude by saying : "It requires no priation is uo broader than that of taxatiou, ond therefore as Congress eannot levy a tas. tor local pui-pose as distinguished froin a National one, it cannotappropriate nioney. for such a local purpose," Tho minority of theeonimittee, consisting of Senators Eduiunds and Wright, iu tho oourse or thoir diaaenüng.report, say : " If it bo the jadgment of Congress that the general welfare will be promoted by the tree iinpartution goods to bc used for a particular purpose in a particular place, 'not because it is a particular placo or ia a particular State, uut becauso the obieet to whieh they aro to be devoted happen by accident to be one to bo attainable ia sume one Statu or place, there can be gaid to be no prefcreuce to that Htate or placo a sueh, altnough the game goods and for the same puipose could not be used on that occasion, oron any othor occasion in any other State, lts real spirit aud essence in sueh case ,is not to interioro with niformity or créate a preference between States, but it is toaoconmlish the general welfate by aidmg a particular object or a special eiiterprise, wnich must of necessity be looated soinewhere, aud not everywhere in tho country While, as we have seen, theretore, such a law does not viólate the letter oi the Goustitution, it is equally clear that it does not violatttits spirit, whioh, aa we havo seen, was to prevent the oppression of a particular State for tho beneiit ot others, and not to prevent Congress, when tho R-eneral welfare required it,. trom allovving all citizons of tho country to briug in goods üi aid of somo obioot,. whicli happened to. bo attamab e by their use in a particular place." The majority cite many acts of Congress relatmg to import duties in contornnty with the foregoing construction oí the Constitution ïhe minority say the report ot the majoritv treats the bilí m uestion as if , were i bilí declaring that all gcols sed in Boston sliould have a drawbaok, vhiuh is not the case, and therefore the rguoicnt directo! against such a propoïtion has no application to the the pres ' ut bill.