Either the argument was unfounded, or the constitution was wrong; and the powers of the sword and the purse ought not to have been conferred on the government of the union.

Whatever speculative opinions might be entertained on this point, they were to administer the government according to the principles of the constitution as it was framed.

But, it was added, if so much power follows the assumption as the objection implies, is it not time to ask--is it safe to forbear assuming?
if the power is so dangerous, it will be so when exercised by the states.

If assuming tends to consolidation, is the reverse, tending to disunion, a less weighty objection?
if it is answered that the non-assumption will not necessarily tend to disunion; neither, it may be replied, does the assumption necessarily tend to consolidation.
It was not admitted that the assumption would tend to perpetuate the debt.

It could not be presumed that the general government would be less willing than the local governments to discharge it; nor could it be presumed that the means were less attainable by the former than the latter.
It was not contended that a public debt was a public blessing.