Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Mass.) 1828-1830, 1830-03-23

his strength. He had retired, from long
and distinguished publick service here, to
the renewed pursuit of professional dates:
carrying with him all that enlargement and
expansion, all the new strength and force,
which an acquaintance with the more gen.
eral subjects discussed in the national coun-
ellis is capable of adding to professional at
tainment, in mind of true greatness and
comprehension. He was lawyer, and he
was also statesman. He had studied the
Constitution, when he filled publick station,
that he might defend it he had examined
its principles, that he might maintain them
More than all men, or at least as much as
any man, he was attached to the General
Government and to the Union of the States.
His feelings and opinions all run in that di-
rection. A question of Constitutional Law,
too, was, of all subjects, that one, which was
best suited to his talents and learning.
Aloof from technicality, and unfettered by
artificial rule, such question gave opportu-
nifty for that deep and clear analysis, that
mighty grasp of principle, which so much
distinguished his higher efforts. His very
statement, was argument; his inference,
seemed demonstration. The earnestness
Of his own conviction, wrought conviction in
others. One was convinced, and believed,
and assented because it was gratifying, de-
lightful to think, and feel, and believe, in
periority. &
MIR. Dexter, sir, such as have described
him argued the New England cause. He
put into his effort his whole heart, as well as
all the powers of his understanding for
he had avowed, in the most publick man
ner his entire concurrence with his
neighbours, on the point in dispute. He
argued the cause, it was lost, and New
England submitted. The established tribu-
nails pronounced the law constitutional, and
New England acquiesced. Now, sir, is not
this the exact opposite of the doctrine of the
gentleman from South Carolina Accord
ing to him, instead of referring to the judi
cial tribunals, we should have broken up
the embargo, by laws of our own; we
should have repealed it, quoad New-Eng-
land; for we had strong, palpable, and
oppressive case. Sir, we believed the en-
barge unconstitutional: but still, that was
matter ofopinion, and who was to decide it !?
We thought it clear case; but, neperthe-
less, we did not take the law into our own
hands, because we did not wish to bring
about revolution, nor to break up the Uni
on: for maintain, that, between submits
sion to the decision of the constituted tribu-
mails, and revolution, or disunion, ,here
is no middle ground-there is no am
biguous condition, half allegiance and half
rebellion. There IS no treason, madcosy.
And, sir, how futile, how very futile it is, to
admit the right of State interference, and
then attempt to save it from the character
Of unlawful resistance, BY adding terms of
qualification to the cases and occasions,
leaving all these qualifications, like the
case itself in the discretion of the State
Governments. 1t must be clear case, it is
said deliberate case; a palpable case !;
still left at liberty to decide for herself, what
is clear, what is deliberate, what is palpable,
what is dangerous. Do adjectives and cpl
thnts ava;l any ching (? sir, the human mind
is SO constituted, that the merits of both
sides OF controversy appear very clear,
and very palpabe, to those who respective
ly espouse them; and both sides usually
grow clearer. as the controversy advances.
South Carolina sees unconstitutionality in
the tariff; she sees oppression there also !;
and she, sees danger. Pennsylvania, with
visionAiot less sharp, looks at the same Ia
riff and sees no such thing in it-she sees it
all constitutional, all useful. all safe. The
faith OF South Carolina is strengthened by
opposition, and she now not only sees, but
ResotUes, that the tariff Is palpablv uncon-
stltutlonal, oppressive, and dangerous: but
Pennsylvania, mot to be behind her neighbors,
and equally willing to strengthen her own
faith by confident asseveration, ResoLues
also and gives to every warm affirmative of
South Carolina, plain, downright Pennsyl-
vana negative. South Carolina, to show
the strength and unity of her opinion brings
her Assembly to a unanimity within seven
votes: Pennsylvania, not to be outdone in
this respect more than others. reduces her
dissentient fraction to five votes.
Now, sir, again ask the gentleman,
what is to be done Are these States both
right? Is he bound to consider them both
right If, not, which is in the wrong? or
rather, which has the best right to decide !?
And ifhe, and if I, are not to know what the
Constitution means, and what it is, till those
two State Legislatures, and the twenty two
others, shall agree in its construction, what
have we sworn to, when we have sworn to
maintain it was forcibly struck, sir,
with one reflection. as the gentleman went
on in his speech.
He quoted Mr.. Madison's resolutions to
prove that a State may interfere, in case
of deliberate, paipabie, and dangerous ex-
ercise of a power not granted. The hon.
durable member supposes the tariff law to
be such an exercise of power; and that,
consequently, case has arisen in which
the State may, if it see fit, interfere by its
own law. Now it so happens, never heless,
that Mr.. Madison himself deems this same
! tariff law quite constitutional. Instead of a
clear and palpable violation, it is, in his
Judgement, no violation at all. So that,
while they use his authority for hypotheti-
cal case, they reject it in the very case be-
fore them. All this, sir. shows the inherent
-futility-I had almost used stronger
word-of conceding this power of interfer-
ence to the States, and then attempting to
"a e. L. C.