this loyal government as the rightful government of the state of Virginia. And such government could therefore give its consent to the erection of a new state, formed out of part of the territory of Virginia. The legislature of the new state, when established, could agree, by the consent of Congress, with the government of the old state as to the terms and conditions of the partition. This doctrine has been accepted by the courts.354

APPROPRIATIONS AND EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC

MONEY

127. The Constitution provides that "no money shall be drawn from the treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law, and a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time."

The amount of money estimated as necessary for all the expenses of the government in the ensuing fiscal year is now calculated in detail and with particularity by the Bureau of the Budget, established by the Act of June 10, 1921 (42 Stat. 20) and submitted annually to Congress by the President, but there is nothing in the law or the Constitution to prevent Congress from appropriating greater or less sums, or for other purposes, than are specified in the budget. Its discretion in this matter is uncontrolled, and its reasons for any appropriation or expenditure of public money cannot be inquired into by the executive officers or the courts.355 There is, indeed, an implied limitation that public money shall not be expended for purely private purposes.356 But a grant to private persons may be justified in consideration of services rendered or other contributions by them to the general prosperity or welfare, as in the case of pensions to disabled soldiers, and in the case of the bounty at one time offered by Congress on sugar produced within the United States.357 But practically there is no restraint upon the power of Congress in its dealing with the money of the gov

354 Virginia v. West Virginia, 11 Wall. 39, 20 L. Ed. 67.

355 Mumford v. United States, 31 Ct. CL. 210; Quick Bear v. Leupp, 30 App. D. C. 151.

356 See Millard v. Roberts, 202 U. S. 429, 26 S. Ct. 674, 50 L. Ed. 1090.

357 United States v. Realty Co., 163 U. S. 427, 16 S. Ct. 1120, 41 L. Ed.

ernment, except the provision in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution granting to the Congress the power of taxation "to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States." These words are capable of interpretation in a very broad sense, and no objection on constitutional grounds has successfully been made to the donating of public money by Congress to the various states in aid of road-building, education, the hygiene of maternity, and many other purposes, or indeed for a purpose so extraneous to the welfare of the United States as that contemplated in the Act of February 25, 1919 (40 Stat. 1161) appropriating one hundred million dollars for the relief of various populations in Europe, impoverished and threatened with famine as a result of the Great War. Congress is specially authorized to "pay the debts of the United States," but the word here used is not to be restricted to such debts as would ordinarily be recoverable in an action at law, but may include claims of citizens which rest upon obligations of right and justice or upon considerations of a merely moral or honorary nature.358

POLICE POWER VESTED IN CONGRESS

128. Within the scope of its supreme authority, and in the exercise of its expressly granted powers, Congress has the right to enact measures relating to the public police of the nation. Congress has no general power to make police regulations for the people of the United States, nor has it authority to interfere, in matters not committed to its exclusive jurisdiction, with the internal affairs of the states under the guise of police regulations, such authority being denied to the federal government and reserved to the states by the tenth amendment to the Constitution.359 But within its appointed sphere Congress possesses paramount authority and may legislate for the pres

358 United States Sugar Equalization Board v. P. De Ronde & Co. (C. C. A. Del.) 7 F.(2d) 981; Chieves v. United States, 42 Ct. Cl. 21; Maine v. United States, 36 Ct. Cl. 531; New Orleans v. Clark, 95 U. S. 654, 24 L. Ed. 521; Lycoming County v. Union County, 15 Pa. 166, 53 Am. Dec. 575. The commonlaw principle that a naked promise without consideration creates no right of action does not apply to grants of money by statute. Mumford v. United

States, 31 Ct. Cl. 210.

359 Commonwealth v. Breakwater Co., 214 Mass. 10, 100 N. E. 1034; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Pendleton, 95 Ind. 12, 48 Am. Rep. 692; Solon v. State, 54 Tex. Cr. R. 261, 114 S. W. 349.

ervation of national existence, the protection of national integrity, and the supremacy of national law. And to this end, it may provide for the punishment of treason, the suppression of insurrection or rebellion, and for the putting down of all individual or concerted attempts to obstruct or interfere with the discharge of the proper business of the government or those operations of commerce over which it has exclusive jurisdiction. So also in the important case of Re Neagle,360 the doctrine was laid down that there is "a peace of the United States," which it is the right and duty of federal officers to defend and preAnd it belongs to the United States, as a sovereign and independent nation, to determine what classes or races of foreigners shall be admitted to settle within its limits, and who shall be forbidden, and also to expel or deport these unnaturalized aliens whose presence may be deemed detrimental to the general welfare.361

Again, since the adoption of the eighteenth amendment, Congress is specifically vested with power of legislation over a subject which is universally recognized as within the scope of police regulations, namely, the suppression of the traffic in intoxicating liquors and the prohibition of their use for beverage purposes, and the constitutionality of the severe law passed for the enforcement of that amendment has been fully sustained.362

So also, in legislating for the District of Columbia, over which Congress is vested by the Constitution with "exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever," that body possesses the police power to the same extent as the legislature of a state when making regulations for the people of the state. It was on this ground that the courts sustained

360 135 U. S. 1, 10 S. Ct. 658, 34 L. Ed. 55. So, also, in Re Siebold, 100 U. S. 371, 25 L. Ed. 717, Mr. Justice Bradley said: "We hold it to be an incontrovertible principle that the government of the United States may, by means of physical force, exercised through its official agents, execute on every foot of American soil the powers and functions that belong to it. This necessarily involves the power to command obedience to its laws, and hence the power to keep the peace to that extent."

361 Mahler v. Eby, 264 U. S. 32, 44 S. Ct. 283, 68 L. Ed. 549; United States v. Williams, 194 U. S. 279, 24 S. Ct. 719, 48 L. Ed. 979; Ng Fung Ho v. White, 259 U. S. 276, 42 S. Ct. 492, 66 L. Ed. 938; Low Wah Suey v. Backus, 225 U. S. 460, 32 S. Ct. 734, 56 L. Ed. 1165; Zakonaite v. Wolf, 226 U. S. 272, 33 S. Ct. 31, 57 L. Ed. 218; United States v. Rodgers (C. C. A. Pa.) 112 C. C. A. 382, 191 F. 970; Petition of Brooks (D. C. Mass.) 5 F.(2d) 238.

262 Rhode Island v. Palmer, 253 U. S. 350, 40 S. Ct. 486, 64 L. Ed. 946. See United States v. Freund (D. C. Mont.) 290 F. 411.

the validity of an act passed in 1919 declaring that the leasing of buildings in the District of Columbia was a business clothed with a public interest and making stringent regulations in favor of tenants of leased property. On the same principle, a law regulating and requiring the licensing of pawnbrokers in the District of Columbia is a valid exercise of the power of Congress.364 But here, as elsewhere, the police power cannot override the constitutional guaranties of personal freedom and the rights of property, so that when Congress passed a minimum wage law for women workers in the District of Columbia it was adjudged invalid.365

But beyond all these considerations, Congress is invested by the Constitution with certain specific powers, some of them of great scope and magnitude, and when the federal government "exerts any of the powers conferred upon it by the Constitution, no valid objection can be based upon the fact that such exercise may be attended by the same incidents which attend the exercise by a state of its police power, or that it may tend to accomplish a similar purpose." 866 Thus, under the power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce, as has been shown on a preceding page,367 Congress has enacted many laws which are distinctly of the nature of police regulations. So, while Congress has no authority to legislate directly for the suppression of lotteries, yet having exclusive control over the postal system it has power to prohibit the use of the mails for the transmission of lottery advertisements.3 368 And either under the commerce clause or as an exertion of national sovereignty, the laws are valid which regulate immigration and prohibit the entry of insane persons, paupers, convicts, anarchists, assisted immigrants, contract laborers, and others.369

363 Block v. Hirsh, 256 U. S. 135, 41 S. Ct. 458, 65 L. Ed. 865, 16 A. L. R. 165.

364 Reagan v. District of Columbia, 41 App. D. C. 409.

365 ADKINS v. CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, 261 U. S. 525, 43 S. Ct. 394, 67 L. Ed. 785, 24 A. L. R. 1238, Black Cas. Constitutional Law, 22, 339.

366 Hamilton v. Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse Co., 251 U. S. 146, 40 S. Ct. 106, 64 L. Ed. 194.

367 See supra, page 202.

368 Champion v. Ames, 188 U. S. 321, 23 S. Ct. 321, 47 L. Ed. 492; IN RE RAPIER, 143 U. S. 110, 12 S. Ct. 374, 36 L. Ed. 93, Black Cas. Constitutional Law, 125.

369 See United States v. Craig (C. C.) 28 F. 795; Church of Holy Trinity v. United States, 143 U. S. 457, 12 S. Ct. 511, 36 L. Ed. 226; Head Money Cases, 112 U. S. 580, 5 S. Ct. 247, 28 L. Ed. 798.

IMPLIED POWERS

129. The Constitution, after enumerating certain powers vested in Congress, provides that Congress shall have power to "make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States or in any department or officer thereof." This clause is the foundation of the doctrine of implied powers.

To recite all the various occasions on which Congress has availed itself of this grant of incidental powers would amount to making a transcript of the federal statutes. But a few illustrations may profitably be introduced, in order to exhibit the practical working of the power. Almost the entire criminal jurisprudence of the United States. is derived from this power. For the punishment of offenses against the revenue, against the postal service, perjury, embezzlement, malfeasance in office, and many other felonies or misdemeanors, is necessary to secure the due and effectual operation of the laws made by Congress in the exercise of its enumerated powers. The money powers of the federal legislature are held to give it the right to issue bonds and establish a system of national banks. Its power to regulate commerce invests it with authority to improve rivers and harbors, to maintain a coast survey, life-saving stations, and a naval observatory, to regulate the liabilities of ocean carriers and the charges of railroads, and to protect commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies and illegal combinations and trusts. Its power to lay and collect taxes furnishes the authority for the establishment and maintenance of the whole elaborate system for the collection of the customs duties and internal revenue. Its authority to establish post-offices and post-roads includes the power to secure the passage of the mails from all obstructions or interruptions, to punish offenses against the postal laws, and to exclude lottery advertisements and indecent matter from the mails, and to grant to telegraph companies a right of way over the public domain. Wherever Congress advances to fill the sphere of legislative jurisdiction confided to it by the great grants of the Constitution, there advances with it the right and power to choose the means by which its laws shall be made effectual and which are appropriate to the ends it is designed to accomplish.