Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1811-06-24
MONDAY, JUNE "a, 1911.

the United States to do. The resolution of
Virginia is bottorned, not on the ground of in
expedency, but on the principle that the
constitution prohibited Congress from grant
ing the bank charter in the first instance;
| that it now prohibited it, and therefore, be-
| cause it was unconstitutional, the legislature
| have instructed their Senator'S in Congress
| to oppose it. Now, sir, although shall not
Immediately and directly violate the consti-
| tuition by voting against the bank, yet l vote
| against it when believe it constitutional and
necessary, it must be known that vote in
! conformity to the instructions of the Virginia
| legislature, and so far as my vote goes it will
warrant and sanction that Interpretation of
| the constitution which the legislature of Vir-
| ginia has given-which interpretation con-
| scienceI believe TO be erroneous. Therefore,
| though in ordinary cases the instructions of a
! legislature may be imperative-Q will not
| determine that question: conclude that
they cannot besso when they require of a
Senator to commit either positive or impli-
| ed breach of the constitution, or TO vote in
| such manner as to warrant such intrrpre-
tation of the constitution as will deprive it of
an Essential attribute. Virginia has the phy-
| steal force but has she a moral rightto violate
| the constitution of the United Statess if she
has it not, can she give it to her legislature
| If her legislature possess it not, can they
| give it to a Sentor? Can the legislature give
me moral right to violate the constitution
of the United States which have sworn to
| support! believe not, sir, and that, in the
| situation in which stand, their instructions
ought to have no operation on the vote am
to give on the subject under consideration.
10 illustrate this question more fully, let
me enquire if state legislature should in
| struct its Senators to vote for a law to take
away the trial by jury in a criminal prosecu-
| ton; would Senator, thus instructed, who
| has sworn to support the constitution of the
| u. States consider himself conscientiously au-
| thorised to vote for such an unconstitutional
measure? When Senator is elected he is
entitled to hold his seat for six years. Sup
pose that Immediately after he is elected the
state from which he is sent gets into state
of direct opposition to and instruction "a
gainst the general government, and should
continue SO for the whole six years for which
| the Senator is elected does this vacate his
| seatl VIII he not still remain in the Senate
| of the United States, and, if he does his duty,
vote for all measures that may be necessary
/ to restrain the unconstitutional acts and in
| surrecton committed by his slater Either
| instructions on constitutional questions to
Senator are imperative or they are not We
| admit that a Senator retains his seat in the
Senate even while his state is engaged In ac-
tual insurrection and rebellion, and conse-
quently in the continued violation of the con-
| stitution of the United States. While Sena-
tor engages in the deliberations of this the
| highest council ofthe nation, is he to obey the
instructions of a state legislature who are in
| the daily violation of the constitution of the
| United States, and are endeavorng wholly to
| destroy it by open and declared instruction,
| and which legislature will consequently in
| struct their Senators to pursue such course as
| will best accomplish the object it has in view
| In this dilemma if instructions are impera-
tive, which if obeyed, violate the constitution
| a Senator will retain his seat in the Senate
of the u. s. for the express purpose of using
| every means in his power to destroy that
constitution which he has sworn to support.
Can it be imagined that it was intended in
any state of things that Senator should hold
his seat in the Senate of the United States,
for the sole purpose of doing all he could to
| overthrow the constitution? Since so absurd,
monstrous and dangerous principle would
/ result from admitting the mandatory infu-
| ence of instructions, when they touch Consti
tutional questions, deem it my duty not to
4 give nv acquescence to, or by my example
/ sanction, doctrine SO hostile TO the general
| spirit and so unfavorable to the preservation
| of the constitution of the U. States.
| Much therefore as respect the sentiments
OF the legislature OF virginia, ana much as IT
| distresses me to 60 in opposition to them,
| believe shall do so on the present occasion.
With respect to the alarm expressed by some
| gentlemen, from the large states Coming for
ward and instructing Congress, / am satisfied
| that no such insidious motives are Justly at
tributable to the legislature Of the state which
/ have the honor to represent / am satisfi-
| ed that it's motives were honorable. pure and
| patriotic, and this measure is n testimony of
the Consistency of character Of the state
| When the charter Of shc bank Of the United
States was first granted, the general senti-
ment Of Virginia was that this law was con
trary to the Constitution of the u States
| Under a different state of things, and under
the domination Of different political party
than at the present time rules the affairs Of
this country, she preserves Consistency of
character. Believing the bank to be uncon-
stitutional then, she now entertains the same
sentiment as when in the minority, and, with
| an honorable consistency of character and
| anxiety to preserve the Constitution inviolate,
she has sent forward instructions to her Sena-
tors in Congress. Whilst therefore ap1pre-
ciate the motive which gave existence 70
these instructions, and highly respect the
source whence they come aud the high con-
sidcTation to which they are entitled gener-
ally, do not on the present occasion cousi-
| der fhern OBLIGATORY To the vote 90, -.