Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1830-11-25
LYNCuBu2,3, NOV. n. IS3,.
JUDGE SMITH al r


This gentleman, finding that his re tection 10
the Y. D. 9enate Is somewhat endangered by
his opposition to The Nulli6c alton dpctr,ne
has addressed long letter TO the people of
south Carollns, Ia viudicatiun OF his sentiments
on h's subject II see rs, in Iced rather sIranUe
that a man like Judge William Snith-wLa. in
1923, was put under the ban If the Calhoun
McDuiHe, Hayne and Hamilton school of no
itclans in South Carolina, and absolutely p
jeeted rom eldce. through their influence.
because he vas thsn, as he IS nov. friend Of
state Rights such as James Madison. both
Ia ys aud 1882 would describe, should now
be placed In exactly the .sane predicame n l..
by the influence OF the SANE men Tor an exact
" opposite feasnn--tn VII, that &c is not vii
Ing 10 push his STATE Right doctrines As far a.
they are, WHO, seven years ago, cDniended that
the State governments had 'toiadsreut rights at
all Ncthng eau show m IL larcibiy the DIS :
honesty Of the Nalaiyios faction IN south Caro-.
Iina-or place ina more favorable point of
Vie" the hisn ground Of consistency on which
Judge onnth stands We regret that We have
not room for hs entire address, although we do
not concur Win htn IN all of MS views other
claims on our columns will not admit of is
publication. Wepropose, however, to make a
few extracts
The Interpretation here given by Judge
Smith to Mr.. Madson's 90 Report comedies
with Mr. Madison own views of il, as conia in
ed IN his late letter to the Editor of IN, North
American Review. II is, to, the interpretation
uniformly given 10 that Report, until the " new
lights OF South Carolina discovered IN it hid
den c9bal'stc meanng-a threat Of civil war K
diSunjon, lurking under a claim to the exercise
of" constitutional remedies. Judge S. saws :
" My attention was drawn 10 the resolutions
o. hoh Mr.. Madison aud Mr. Jefferson At an
eariy period alter their pronnlgsiion, and prp.
Vous 10 seeing Nr. Medisoo's late letter TO the
Editor ofthe North American Review, had
never entertained any belief tina the object of
the Virginia resolutions contemplated in,erpo-
sing the power OF the state II con.f0i the oper-
atoms OF fhaSe laws. but we're onIy Intended as
basis upsn which the con ttuibnal number
OF the state legislatures might be Induced to
recommend convention to amend aha consii
tulion of the United States so rs to restrain the
operations OF Congress, IN future, under the
Constructive powers. Had they been merely
TO manifest TO the world lhat Virginia had the
power, whenever in the opinion of her cl,izens
Congress hid enacted an unconstitutional law
to call ints exer ise her re,eryed sovrreignly Il
declare those laws null and void, she would GER
isrnly have brought that power 10 act upon
them NJ once. else why declare the laws uucon-
sttutional, and her power To annul them un-
less to gasconade And gasconading was II OF
trait 10 the character Of the Virg mia poIrti
clans Of that day, all Will acknowledge who
knew those thlt acted in her councils. But Mr..
Madison has put an end TO this question, BY his
exposition IN that letter. wherein he saws pxpIi.
Gully, thar no such power was intended to be
assumed, that state could pnilify Il law of
Congress. Mr.. Madison not only asserts this.
but refers 10 the debates 10 the Virginia leeis.
lature upon those resolutions. IL WAS al so
manifest from he fact, that Virginia transmit.
ted the resolutions to the other states of the
union, all, OF most of which. Il speak from re-
collection only as have not the resolutions be-
lore me- r"tn'ned their answers IN the mega
tive which are recorded with the resolutions.
Upon the return Of these negative answers
Virginia finding herself unsupported, ceased 10
ac Ii would seem therefore that the doctrine
81 nulllfication Is not derived from thai source
Nor have We the example ot Vrs mia in support
oft"
Judge Smith then takes up the Kentucky
Revolutions VIII ch have been attributed 10 Mr..
Jeftrson--th3ugh no doubt trrone ously so at,
trbutrd. He quotes FROM these Resolutions
The only sentence from which the RICH OF a
State to nnlllfy a law ofhe general govern
ment has been attempted TO be deduced 60
wit: " The scterat States that framed
that instrunent' the Constitution "being
sovereign an' independent have the un-
questionable right TO Judge it, nfractlons !;
and notification by those sovereicns of ali
unauthorized acts, done under color of that in.
strumen'. is the rIghuu remedy" Now, no
one disputes thu, :" The Statss' unquestonably
have this right. They formed the cenfe aoracy, g.
they have the right not only TO Judge Of all in.
fractions ofthe instrum ent by which il is he Id
together but also TO dissolve the confederacy
itself, whenever they 'hink proper. BI, because
| /" The States have a right to do this, does it
! follow that STATE has right to do it TIE
States have right 10 declare war gsinsi .
foreign power but has a State the same right 7
Ii is by confronting the rights of a Slate with
the rights OF The States alone, that the Nulifca-
ton doctrine can be sustained by the authority
of the Virginia Report and Resolutions, or he
Kentucky Resolutions il can never be sustain-
ed by argument or reason--for its admission
on this point, says:
= Now the papable and obvious sense OF this
sentence is, that tho several Stale, have this
power. Indeed it is so expressed. Not that
any of the States, or any State has tins power.
| 1t cannot he made to mean any other than the
whole of the States. or such constltntio m a
! iori,u ara nv he ron .tir,i.iOn al