per to dwell a moment on the point, in order to understand more fully the real character of the acts, under which the interest of this, and other states similarly situated, has been sacrificed. The facts are few and simple. The constitution grants to Congress the power of imposing a duty on imports for revenue; which power is abused by being converted into an instrument for rearing up the industry of one section of the country on the ruins of another. The violation then consists in using a power, granted for one object, to advance another, and that by the sacrifice of the original object. It is, in a word, a violation of perversion, the most dangerous of all, because the most insidious, and difficult to resist⟨.⟩ Others cannot be perpetrated without the aid of the judiciary; this may be, by the executive and legislative alone. The courts by their own decisions cannot

look into the motives of legislators—they are obliged to take acts by their titles and professed objects, and if they be constitutional they cannot interpose their power, however grossly the acts may violate the constitution. The proceedings of the last session sufficiently prove, that the House of Representatives are aware of the distinction, and determined to avail themselves of the advantage.

In the absence of arguments drawn from the constitution itself, the advocates of the power have attempted to call in the aid of precedent. The committee will not waste their time in examining the instances quoted. If they were strictly in point they would be entitled to little weight. Ours is not a government of precedents, nor can they be admitted, except to a very limited extent, and with great caution, in the interpretation of the constitution, without changing in time the entire character of the instrument. The only safe rule is the constitution itself, or, if that be doubtful, the history of the times. In this case, if doubts existed, the journals of the convention would remove them. It was moved in that body to confer on Congress, the very power in question; to encourage manufactures, but it was deliberately withheld, except to the extent of granting patent rights for new and useful inventions. Instead of granting the power to Congress, permission was given to the states to impose duties, with consent of that body, to encourage their own manufactures; and thus in the true spirit of justice, imposing the burden on those, who were to be benefited. But giving to precedents, whatever weight may be claimed, the committee feel confident, that in this case there are none in point, previous to the adoption of the present Tariff system. Every instance which has been cited, may fairly be referred to the legitimate power of Congress to impose duties on imports for revenue. It is a necessary incident of such duties to act as an encourage-