The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1829-02-25

me as affirming, that either of you was
privy to this plan of military execution in
1904. That may be known to yourselves
and not to me. A letter of your first signer,
recently published, has disclosed the fact,
that he, although the pu:ative was not the
real father of the Hartford Convention. AS
he, who has hitherto enjoyed unrivalled,
the honors, is now disposed to bestow upon
others the shame of its paternity, may not
the ostensble and the real character of
other incidents attending it, be alike diver
sihed, so that the main and ultimate object
of that assembly, though beaming in SPLEEN
dor from its acts, was yet in dim eclipse to
the vision of its most distinguished mem
bers?
However this may be, it was this project
of 1903 and d, which, from the time when I
first took my seat in the Senate of the Unit
ed States, alienated me from the secret
councils of those leaders of the federal par
ty. / was never initiated in them. an
proved and supported the acquisition Of
Louisiana; and from the first moment that
the project of separation was made known
to me, | opposed to it a determined and
infexible resistance.
1t is well known to some of you, gentle
men, that the cession Of Louisiana was not
the first occasion upon which my duty to nv
country prescribed to me aScourse of con-s
duct different from that which would have
been dictated to me by the leaders and the
spirit of party. More than one of YOU waz
present at meeting of members of the
Massachusetts Legislature, on the 9th of
May, 1902, the day after | first took nv
seat as member of that Legislature. A
proposal then made by me, to admit to the
council Of the commonwealth, proportions
al representation Of the minority as it exist
ed in the two houses, has, trust, not been
forgotten. 1t was the first act of my legis-
lative life, and it marked the principle by
which my whole public career has been
governed, from that day to this. NV pro-
posal was unsuccessful, and perhaps it for
feited whatever confidence might have been
otherwise bestowed upon me as party
follower. My conduct in the Senate of the
United States, with regard to the Louisiana
cession, was not more acceptable to the
leaders of the federal party, and some of
you may perhaps remember that it was not
suffered to pass without notice or censure.
in the public federal journals of the time.
With regard to the project of separate
Northern Confederacy, formed IN the win
ter of 1903, in consequence of the Lou
lslana cession, it is not to me that you must
apply for copies Of the correspondence in
which it was contained. To that, ana TO
every other project of disunion, have been
constantly opposed. Ely principles do not
admit the right even of the people, still less
Of the legislature Of any one State in the
Union, to secede at pleasure from the
Union. No provision is made for the exer-
else of this right, either by the federal, or
any of the State constitutions. The act of
exercising it, presupposes departure from
the principle of compact, and a resort to
that of force.
If, in the exercise of their respective
functions, the legislative, executive, and
Judicial authorities of the Union on one
side, and of one or more States on the 9th
err, are brought into direct collision with
each other, the relations between the par
ties are no longer those of constitutional
right, but of independent force. Each party
CONSTITUTES the common compact for itself.
The constructions are irreconcilabe togeth-
er There is no umpire between them, and
the appeal is to the sword, the ultimate
arbiter ofrght between independent States,
but not between the members of one body
polite. | therefore hold it as principle
without exception, that whenever the con-
stituted authorities of a State, authorize
resistance TO any act Of Congress, or pro-
nounce it unconstitutional, they do hereby
declare themselves and their State cuodd
hoe out of the pale of the Union. That
there is no supportable case, in which the
people OF State might place themselves in
this attitude, by the primitive right of insur-
rectlon against oppression, will not affirm:
but they have delegated no such power to
their legislatures or their judges; and if
there be such right, it is the right Of an
individual to commit siIicide-the right of
an lnhabitant of a populous city to set fire
to bis own dwelling house. These are my
views But to those, who think that each
State is sovereign judge, not only of its
own rights, but of the extent of powers con-
terred upon the general government by the
people OF the whole Union; and that each
State, giving its own construction to the
constitutional powers of Congress, may ar
ray Its separate sovereignty against every
act OF that body transcendng this estimate
OF their powers; to say of men holding
these principles, that, for the ten years from
1904 to 1914, they were intending disso-
luton of the Union, and the formation of
new Coniederacy. is charging them with
nothing more than with acting up to their
principles.
TO the purposes of party leaders, intend
ing to accomplish the dissolution of the
Union and new Confcderacy, two postu-
lates are necessary. First, an act or acts
of Congress, which may be resisted, as 1tn-
CONSTITUTIONAL; and, secondly, a state OF
excitement among the people of one or
more States of the Union sufficiently in
famed to produce acts of the State legisla-
lures, conflicting with acts Of Congress.
Resolutions of the legislatures denying the
powers Of Congress, are the first steps in
this march of disunion; but they avail moth
ing, without subsequent and corresponding
action. The annexon of Louisiana to the