other civilized nations, they still retain their original character, and continue dormant. But so far as they have been practically exerted, they exist in fact: they are well understood by both parties; have been asserted by the one and admitted by the other. When the war of the Revolution commenced, so far from advancing a claim to their lands, or asserting any right of dominion over their persons, Congress resolved "that the securing and preserving the friendship of the Indian nations was a subject of the utmost moment." Commissioners were appointed "to treat with the Indians, in the name and on the behalf of the United Colonies, in order to preserve their peace and friendship ;" and the most strenuous exertions were made to procure those articles on which Indian friendships were supposed to depend; and, in short, everything was done to promote trade and avoid hostilities with them.

The general law of European sovereigns, respecting their claims in America, limited the intercourse of individuals, in a great degree, to the particular potentate whose ultimate right of domain was acknowledged by the others. The consequence was, that their supplies were derived chiefly from that nation, and their trade confined to it. Goods indispensable to their comfort, in the shape of presents, were received from the same hand; and, what was of still more importance, the strong arm of government was interposed to restrain the disorderly and licentious from intrusions into their country, encroachments on their lands, and from those acts of violence which were often attended by reciprocal bloodshed and slaughter. The Indians perceived, in this protection, only what was beneficial to themselves. It involved, practically, no claim upon their lands; no dominion over their persons; but merely bound them

to the British crown before the Revolution, and to the United States afterward, as dependant allies, claiming the protection of a powerful friend and neighbour, and receiving the advantages of that protection, without involving a surrender of their national character.

From the commencement of the government, Congress has, from time to time, passed laws to regulate trade and intercourse with the Indian tribes, which treat them as nations, respect their rights, and manifest a firm purpose to afford that protection to them which treaties stipulate. All these acts, and especially the law now in force, obviously consider the several Indian nations as distinct political communities, having territorial boundaries, within which their authority is exclusive. The treaties and laws of the United States contemplate the Indian territory as completely separated from that of the states, and provides that all intercourse with them shall be carried on exclusively by the Government of the United States; while the powers to regulate commerce, declare war, make peace, and conclude treaties, comprises all that is required for regulating our intercourse with the Indian tribes.

II. The power to establish postoffices and postroads is necessarily connected with the regulation of commerce and the promotion of the general welfare. A regular system of free and speedy communication is not only of vital importance to the mercantile interests of the country, but, on a more enlarged view of the subject, must be admitted to be of great general benefit. In time of peace, it facilitates and promotes commercial intercourse, tends to keep the people informed of their political interests, assists the measures of government and the private communications between individuals. In war, the rapid

transmission of intelligence by means of the public mails, and the greater facility of transferring bodies of troops, and transporting military stores, by means of good and substantial roads, are advantages as evident as they are desirable.

If the establishment of postoffices and postroads should in practice be productive of no revenue to the public, the expense would be properly chargeable on the general funds of the Union, and the proceeds of taxation in the common forms be justly applied to defray it. If, however, as has proved to be the case, the postoffice establishment should continue to yield a revenue, which, in common with the other funds of the Union, is applicable only to the purposes of the General Government, it is obvious that no state should be permitted to interfere by establishing a postoffice department of its own. The power, therefore, vested in Congress is exclusive, so far as relates to the conveyance of letters, and other articles transmissible by post. In regard to postroads, it would be unnecessary, and therefore unwarrantable, in Congress to make another road where a sufficient one already exists; while, on the other hand, no state has power to deny or obstruct the passage of the mails, the marching of troops, or the transportation of the property of the United States over its public roads.

The power of Congress in relation to the subject was brought into operation soon after the adoption of the Constitution, and various provisions respecting it have since, at different times, been enacted, all founded on the principle of its being exclusive, so far as it respects the establishment of postroads, and the conveyance of letters and other articles by post. Under this power, in conjunction with the powers of Con

gress to raise money to provide for the general welfare, and to pass all laws necessary and proper to carry into execution the other powers vested in the - General Government, Congress has from time to time set apart funds for internal improvements, in the several states, by means of roads and canals. This power has been exercised for a long series of years; and although often questioned and denied, is now vindicated by precedent. The practice has been to allow to the new states, on their admission into the Union, a certain proportion of the proceeds arising from the sale of the public lands therein, to be laid out in the construction of roads and canals within those states, or leading thereto. In the year 1806, Congress authorized a road to be opened from Nashville in Tennessee to Natchez in the then Mississippi Territory, without asking the consent of the State of Tennessee; and in 1809, the President was authorized to cause the canal De Carondelet, leading from the Lake Ponchartrain to the city of NewOrleans, to be extended to the River Mississippi. The bill authorizing the former of these works was objected to by Mr. Jefferson, but was, upon reconsideration, passed, notwithstanding his objections, by the constitutional majority of two thirds of the members present in both houses of Congress; while the bill authorizing the latter was not objected to, though passed under the same administration, from the circumstance, it may be presumed, that the improve. ment it contemplated was wholly within a territory of the United States.

The Cumberland Road, upon which so much has been said in and out of Congress, and so much public money has been expended, was first authorized by an act of Congress, passed also in 1806, and was constructed under a covenant with the State of Ohio,

that a portion of the proceeds of the public lands lying within that state should be applied to the opening of roads leading to it, with the consent of the states through which the road might pass. But the expenditures upon it having exceeded the proceeds of the lands appropriated for its construction, President Madison, in 1816, objected to a bill appropriating a fund, of which a portion would have been available for continuing it, on the ground that the Constitution did not extend to making roads and canals, and improving water-courses through the different states; and that the assent of those states could not confer the power. Afterward, in 1822, President Monroe objected to a bill appropriating money for repairing the Cumberland Road, and establishing gates and tolls upon it, on similar grounds; and in both instances the bills were eventually lost.

On

On these and other similar occasions, there was, however, a decided difference of opinion between. the majority of Congress and the President. Mr. Jefferson in 1806, Mr. Madison in 1816, and Mr. Monroe in 1822, denied any such power in Congress as these bills assumed to exist; or that it could be vested in that body, either by the consent of the states to the works proposed, or in any other mode than an amendment of the Federal Constitution. the other hand, it appears that Congress claims the power to lay out, construct, and improve postroads and military roads, at all events with the assent of the states through which they pass, as well as to cut canals for promoting internal commerce, and the more safe and economical transportation of military stores in time of war, leaving, in all these cases, the jurisdictional right over the soil in the respective states. By an act passed in 1824, with the assent of Mr. Monroe, the necessary surveys, plans, and estimates