Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1828-1831, 1830-03-05

hSoW state Legtstdture. In fact IL this government
national, consolidated government, or . Fedora
Government" &c. &c. &c.
We have quoted enough from the Enquire sto OK
plain what il is at. The Editors Of that pspc
will be surprised to learn, that between Mr. Web
ster and themselves, there is not upon this question
OF the origin or powers Of the Government, th
slightest imaginable difference of opinion. Tn
whole dispute 10 one Of words; not things He af
firms tho Government Of the q. States, TO be III,
Peoples Government, 'madc by the People; mad
Tor the People; answerable to the People" And is
not so' All! but (says the Enquircr) the people i,
originating and adopting the Constitution acted b,
and through the State Legislatures, and not in ano
thcr way-as the members of single, separate, Slut,
sovercgnties and not the people fthe U. State.
nmaigamated into one. True they did SO. His,or,
vouches for it, and Mr.. Webster was not simple Of
ignorant enough to deny it The inference from th.
ana other facts, drawn by the Enquirer, is that tn,
Federal Government is u Government of Independent
sovereign States, and not a consolidated govern
ment. This too Mr.. Webster acknowledge Lie
agrees that the Federal Government is limited e
certain, specific, chartered powers and beyond those
limitations that the State Governments are sovereign
against the whole world. Where then is the differ
ence between the Senator and the Editors of the En-
quireH They agree perfectly in the origio of the
General Government-that It was derived from non.
ular WILL expressed and acting not through the whole
people of the u. States Ms one people but tbropuh
the people Of the several States rs independent and
distinct overegntcs They ugrec also in their views
of the State and Federal OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES the lat
ter is limited, but sovereign within those limits ii;
laws being declared the paramount law of tho land.
no Con eli ~ 4 81,
arc sovereign, wherever sovereignty is not convey
ed to the Federal Government. There is however,
somewhere or somehow, mighty difference between
Mr. Webster and Mr. Ritchic. What is it, II is
this, reader--and hold the idea by the tall fyon can
Mr. Webster says the Federal Government is an
swerabe to the People Of the y. Siates--Mr
kItche says it is answerable to the States, that
Is to the People Of the several States through
the State Governments! One would suppose
that the people Of the u. States, and the pee
pie inhabitng the several Suites called the IT, States
were one and the same people; yet Mr.. Richie
makes them out two very different things. We do not
understand Mr.. Webster any where or ut any time.
as denying, that the people may act upon the Fed
eral Government, through their State authorities.
That inference Is violently ind unfairly ascribed to
nim' Each State may contr oul its Senators, and q
sufficient number of States concurrine, NAV thus
controul the Federal Government He does not de.
ny the right Of the States to instruct or the obpa
ton OF the Senator instructed to obey. He contends
OF he may consistently contend that this is one OK
ample OF the truth Of his position, that the Fedora
Government Is "answerable to the people" The
State Legislatures speaking the wishes of the people
for it is that which gives virtue to their instructions
instruct their Senators. The Senators obey. and
thus the people by another name controul the gov.
eminent Doing it through the State Legislatures
Is the mode it is not the thing itself 1t is the people
and the people only, at last-and if we imagine ,
case' IN which State Legislature attempts to con-
trou the General Government, clearly, acknowledge
~ IN opposition to the wishes of the people of the
state every man and feels at once that is the
people and not the Legislature, to whom obedience
and the right OF confronting the Government belong
Even here then, we see no substantial difference
between the Orator and the Editor-cxccpt this that
one deals in plain common sense, which evcry mar
can undcrs tand-the other in metaphysical abstrac
tons, which if he is fortunate enough to comprehend
himself, he yet can never make the people cempre
bend.
Mr.. Wcbster's speech vindcates his title to be con-
sidered advocate Of State Rights, Familiarity SC
called, in the fullest manner. lie contends for ,hei,
sovereignty. in all cases, where they have not dives
ted themselves oft, by cesson to the General Gov
ernmcnt: He contends thatth Federal Government,
is limited g. that if that limit is ovcrstepped the act j:
null and void lie recognizes the right of the States
to interfere by complaint by remonstrancc by amend
ment lie even recognizes their right to nullify an
act Of the Federal Government but he insists tina
this is right not ohhin, but beyond, tho Con.
stution; that il is revolution, that ultimate RICH,
which every people possess, to change, modify abol-
ish, destroy, at pleasure. All this he recognizes
and how rresstiby he drives and ciinches as he
the reader will discover by reading his speech.
In what then does Mr.. Webster stop short of being
State Right man, under the newest PATENT Where
in is he offensive to s. Carolina and to the now lights
in and out Of Congress In two respects First. he
aedges that the Supreme Court is the arber bet