The Sun.
London, England, 1860-12-18 00:00:00

of resisting the slow decay of time and of defying the storms
of ages.
Indeed, well may the jealous patriots of that day have
indulged fears that a Government of such high powers
might violate the reserved rights of the States, and wisely
did they adopt the rule of a strict construction of these
powers to prevent the danger I But they did not fear, nor
had they a• y reason to imagine, that the Constitution would
ever be so interpreted as to enable any State, by her own
act, and without the consent of her sister States, to dis-
charge her people from all or any of their Federal oblige- '
tions.
It may be asked, then, are the people of the states with-
out redress against the tyranny and oppression of the
Federal Government ? By no means. The right of resis-
tance on the part of the governed against the oppression of
their governments cannot be denied.lt exists independently
of all constitutions, and has been exercised at all periods of
the world's history. Under it old governments have been
destroyed, and new ones have taken their place. It is
embodied in strong and express language in our own De-
claration of Independence. But the distinction must ever
be observed, that this is revolution against an established
Government, and not a voluntary secession from it by virtue
of an inherent constitutional right. In short, let us look
the danger fairly in the face : Secession is neither more nor
less than revolution. It may or may not be justifiable revo-
lution, but still it is revolution.
What, in the meantime, is the responsibility and position
of the Executive ? Ho is bound by solemn oath before God
and the country " to take care that the laws be
faithfully executed," from this obligation he cannot be ab-
solved by any human power. But what if the performance
of this duty, in whole or in part, has been rendered im-
practicable by events over which he could have exercised
no control ? Such, at the present moment, is the case
throughout the State of South Carolina, so far as the laws
of the United States to secure the administration of justice
by means of the Federal Judiciary are concerned.
All the Federal officers within its limits, through whose
agency alone these laws can be carried into execution, have
already resigned. We no longer have a district judge, a
district attorney, or a marshal of South Carolina. In fact,
the whole machinery of the Federal Government necessary
for the distribution of remedial justice among the people
has been demolished ; and it would be difficult, if not im-
possible, to replace it.
The only acts of Congress on the statute-book, bearing
upon this subject, are those of the 28th February, 1795, and
3d March, 1807. These authorise the President, after he
shall have ascertained that the marshal with his posse cont.
mitatas is unable to execute civil or criminal process in any
particular case, to call forth the militia and employ the
army and navy to aid him in performing this service, hay-
ing first by proclamation commanded the insurgents " to
disperse and retire peaceably t 3 their respective abodes,
within a limited time." This duty cannot by possibility be
performed in a State where no judicial authority exists to
issue process, and where there is no marshal to execute it,
and where, even if there were such an officer, the entire
population would constitute one solid combination to resist
him.

The bare enumeration of these provisions proves how in-
adequate they are without further legislation to overcome a
united opposition in a single State, not to speak of other
States who may place themselves in a similar attitude.
Congress alone has power to decide whether the present
laws can or cannot be amended so as to carry out more
effectually the objects of the Constitution.
The same insuperable obstacles do not lie in the way of
executing the laws for the collection of the customs. The
revenue still continues to be c.llected, as heretofore, at the
custom-house inCharleston; and should the collector unfor-
tunately resign, a successor may be appointed to perform
this duty.
Then in regard to the property of the United States in
South Carolina. This has been purchased for a fair equiva-
lent, "by the consent of the legislature of the State," " for
the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals" &c., and over these
authority to exercise exclusive legislation has been expressly
granted by the Constitution to Congress. It is not believed
that any attempt will be made to expel the United States
from this property by force ; but if in this I should prove to
be mi-taken, the officer in command of the forts has received
orders to act strictly on the defensive. In such a contin-
gency. the responsibility for consequences would rightfully
rest upon the heads of the assailants.

Apart from the execution of the laws, so far as this may be
practicable, the Executive has no authority to decide what
shall be the relations between the Federal Government and
South Carolina. He has been invested with no such dis-
cretion. He possesses no power to change the relations
heretofore existing between them, much less to acknow-
ledge the independence of that State. This would be to
invest a mere Executive officer with the power of recognis-
ing the dissolution of the Confederacy among our 33 sove-
reign States. It bears no resemblance to the recognition of
a foreign de facto government, involving no such responsi-
bility.

Any attempt to do this would, on his part, be a naked act of
usurpation. It is, therefore, my duty to submit to Con-
gress the whole question in all its bearings. The course of
events is so rapidly hastening forward that the emergency
may soon arise, when you may be called upon to decide
the momentous question whether you possess the
power, by force of arms, to compel a State to remain in the
Union. I should feel myself recreant to my duty were I not
to express an opinion on this important subject.
The question fairly stated is—Has the Constitution dele-
gated to Congress the power to coerce a State into submis-
sion which is attemi ting to withdraw or has actually with-
drawn from the Confederacy ? • If answered in the
affirmative, it must be on the principle that the power has
been conferred upon Congress to declare and to make war
against a State. After much serious reflection I have
arrived at the conclusion that no such power has been dele-
gated to Congress or to any other department of the Federal
Government. It is manifest, upon an inspection of the Con-
stitution, that this is not among the specific and enumerated
powers granted to Congress; and it is equally apparent that
its exercise is not "necessary and proper for carrying into
execution" any one of these powers. So far from this power
having been delegated to Congress, it was expressly refused
by the Convention which framed the Constitution.
It appears, from the proceedings of that body, that on
the 31st May, 1787, the clause " authorising an exertion of
the force of the whole against a delinquent State" came up
for consideration. Mr. Nladison opposed it in a brief but
powerful speech, from which I shall extract but a single
sentence, He observes—" The use of force against a State
would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction
of. punishment ; and would probably be considered by the
party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by
which it might be bound."
Upon his motion the clause was unanimously postponed,
and was never I believe again presented. Soon afterwards,
on the Bth June, 1787, when incidentally adverting to the
subject, he said—" Any Government for the United States,
formed on the supposed practicability of using force against
the unconstitutional proceedings of the States, would prove
as visionary and fallacious as the Government of Congress,"
evidently meaning the then existing Congress of the old
Confederation.
- - -

- - -
Without descending to particulars, it may be safely
asserted, that the power to make war against a State is at
variance with the whole spirit and intent of the Constitu-
tion. Suppose such a war should result in the conquest of
a State, how are we to govern it afterwards ? Shall we
hold it as a province, and govern it by despotic power ?
In the nature of things we could not, by physical force,
control the will of the people and compel them to elect
senators and representatives to Congress, and to perform
all the othsr. duties depending upon their own volition, and
required fin the free citizens of a free State as a consti-
tuent member of the Confederacy.
But, if we possessed this power, would it be wise to exercise
it under existing circumstances ? The object would doubt-
less be to preserve the union. War would not only present
the most effectual means of destroying it; but would
banish all hope of its peaceable reconstruction. Besides,
in the fraternal conflict a vast amount of blood and treasure
would be expended, rendering future reconciliationibetween
the States impossible. In the mean time, wbo can foretell
what would be the suffering and privation of the people
during its existence?
The fact is, that our Union rests upon public opinion,
and can never be cemented by the blood of its citizens shed
in civil war. If it cannot live in the affections of the people,
it must one day perish. Congress posesses many means of
preserving it by conciliation; but the sword was not placed
in their hand to preserve it by force.
But may I be permitted solemnly to invoke my country-
men to pause and deliberate, before they determine to de-
stroy this, the grandest temple which has ever been dedi-
cated to human freedom since the world began ? It has
been consecrated by the blood of our fathers, by the glories
of the past, and by the hopes of the future. The Union has
already made us the most prosperous and, ere long, will, if
preserved, render us he most powerful nation on the face
of the earth. In every foreign region of the globe the
title of American citizen is held in the highest respect, and
when pronounced in a foreign land it causes the hearts of
our countrymen to swell with honest pride. Surely when
we reach the brink of the yawning abyss, we shall recoil
with horror from the last fatal plunge. By such a
dread catastrophe the hopes of the friends of free•
dom throughout the world would be destroyed, and a long
night of laden despotism would enshroud the nations. Our
@temple for more than 80 years would not only be lost ; but
it would be quoted as a conclusive proof that man is unfit
for self-government.

It is not every wrong—nay, it is not every grievous
wrong—which can justify a resort to such a fearful
alternative. This ought to be the last desperate remedy of
a despairing people, after every other constitutional means
of conciliation had been exhausted. We should reflect that
under this free Government there is an incessant ebb and
flow in public opinion, The slavery question, like
everything human, will have its day. I firmly believe that
it has already reached and passed the culminating point.
But if, in the midst of the existing excitement, the Union
shall perish, the evil may then become irreparable Con-
gress can contribute mush to avert it by proposing and
recommending to the legislatures of the several States the
remedy for existing evils, which the Constitution has
itself provided for its own preservation. This has
_ .t It is to be found
been tried at different critical periods of our history,
and always with eminentsuccess,
in the sth article providing for s own amendment. Under
this article amendments have been proposed by two-thirds
of both houses of Congress, and have been' ratified by the
legislatures of three-fourths of the several States," and con-
sequently become parts of the Constitution. To this pro-
cess the country is indebted for the clause prohibiting Con-
gress from passing any law respecting an establishment of
religion, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press,
or of the right of petition. To this we are also indebted for
the Bill of Rights which secures the people against any abuse
of power by the Federal Government. Such were the appre-
.
hensions justly entertained by the friends of State-rights at
that period as to have rendered it extremely doubtful
whether the Constitution could have long survived without
these amendments.
Again, the Constitution was amended by the same pro-
cess after the election of President Jefferson by the House of
Representatives, in February, 1803. This amendment was
rendered necessary to rrevent a recurrence of the dangers
which had seriously threatened the existence of the Govern-
ment during the pendency of that election. The article for
its ewn amendment was intended to secure the amicable
adjustment of conflicting constitutional questions like the
present, which might arise between the government# of the
States and that of the United States. This appears from
contemporaneous history,
In this connection, I shall merely call attention to a few
justly-celebrated report, in
In this he ably add
sentences ntcoe
the
h ien r s
a Atl uarde di
os;
Virginia,
conclusively defended the resolutions of the preceding le-
gislature against the strictures of several other State legis-
latures. These were mainly founded upon the protest of
palpable and alarming infractions of the Con-
Virginiathe legislature against the " Alien and Sedition
te t
5,,,a8
stitution." In pointing out the peaceful and constitutional
remedies, and he referred to none other, to which the States
were authorised 'o resort, on such occasions, he concludes
by saying, "that the legislatures of the States
might have
made a direct representation to Congress with view to
obtain the rescinding of the two oifenstre ads, or they
might have represented to their respective Senator in Con-
gress their wish that two-thirds thereof would propose an
explanatory amendment to the Constitution, or two-thirds
et' thq4seiTee: if attch 4a4 !MU their option, might, by au