The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1830-03-17

und efstdn0 MIN 10 Insist, Lnat II the eXlgen-
cy of the case, in the opinion of any State Gov
eminent, require it, such State Government
may, by its own sovereign authority, annul an
act of the General Government, which it deems
plainly and palpably unconstitutional.
This is the sum of what / understand from
him to be the South Carolina doctrine. | pro-
pose to consider it, and to compare it with the
Constitution. Allow me to say, as prelimI-
nary remark, that call this the South Carolina
doctrine, only because the gentleman himself
has SO denominated it. l do not feel at liberty
to say that South Carolina, as State has ever
advanced these sentiments. ] hope she has
! not, and never may. That great majority of
her people are opposed to the tariff law is doubt
less true. That majority, some what less than
that just mentioned, conscientiously believe
these laws unconstitutional, may probably also
be true. But, that any majority holds to the
right of direc: State interference, at State dis
erection, the right Of multiplying acts of Congress
! by acts of State legislation, is more than know
and what shall be slow to believe.
| That there are individuals, besides the honor
able gentleman, who do maintain these opinions,
is quite certain. recollect the recent express
sion of sentiment, which circumstances at
tending its utterance and publication, justify us
| IN supposing was not unprecedented. "The-
sovereignty of the State never to be eontroll-
ed, construed, or decided on, but by her own
! feelings Of honorable Justice"
! TMr. Hayne here rose, and said, that for the
purpose of being clearly understood, he would
state, that his proposition was in the words Of
! the Virginia resolution, as follows:
| "That this Assembly doth explicitly and Pc
remptorily declare, that it views the powers of
the federal government, as resulting from the
compact to which the States are parties, as
limited by the plain sense and intention of the
instrument constituting that compact, as no far
Their valid than they are authorized by the grants
enumerated in that compact; and that, in case
of deliberate, palpable and dangerous exercise
of other powers, not granted by the said com
( pact, the States who are parties thereto have
! the right and are in duty bound to interpose
for arrcsting the progress of the evil, and for
maintaining, within their respective limits, the
authorities, rights, and liberties appertainng to
! them"
! Mr.. Webster, resumed:
{ am quite aware, Mr.. President, of the ex-
istence of the resolution which the gentleman
read, and has now repeated, and that ne relies
on it, as his authority. know the source, too.
/ from which it is understood to have proceeded.
| need not say, that have much respect for
the constitutional opinions of Mr.. Madison !;
they would weigh greatly with me, always.
| But,before the authority ofhs opinion be vouch-
ed for the gentlemans proposition, it will be
proper to consider what is the fair interpreta-
ton of that resolution, to which Mr.. Madison
is understood to have given his sanction. As
the gentleman CONSTITUTES it, it is ar authority
for him. Possibly, he may not have adopted
the right construction. That resolution de-
clares, that IN the case of the dangerous e1er-
cise Of Poaeers, not grantedby the general GOO
eminent, the States may sEteTp0se to arrest the
! progress Of the ecI. But how interpose, and
what does this declaration purport? Does it
mean no more, than that there may be extreme
cases, in which the people, in any mode of as
sembllng, may resist usurpation, and relieve
themselves from tyrannical government? No
one will deny this. Such resistance is not only
acknowledged to be just in America, but in
England also. Blackstone admits as much, IN
the theory, and practice too, of the English con-
stitution. We, sir, who oppose the Carolina
doctrine, do not deny, that the people may, 4
they choose, throw off any government, when
it becomes oppressive and intolerable, and erect
better in its stead. We all know, that civil
institutions are established for the public bene-
tit, and that, when they cease to answer the
ends of their existence, they may be changed.
But do not understand the doctrine now con-
tended for, to be that which, for the sake of dis
tinctness, we may call the right of revolution
| understand the gentleman to maintain, that
without revolution, without civil commotion,
without rebellion, a remedy for supposed abuse
and transgression of the powers Of the General
Government, lies in direct appeal to the in
reference of the State Governments. TMr
Hayne, here rose: He did not contend, he said
for the mere right of revolution, but for the
right Of constitutional resistance. What he
maintained was, that in case of plain, palpa-
bic violation of the constitution by the General
! Government. State may interpose /; and that
this interposition is CONSTITUTIONAL Mr.. Web
ster, resumed: So, sir, | understood the gen.
tleman, and am happy to find that did not
misunderstood him. What he contends for is,
that it is constitutional to interrupt the admin
lstraton of the constitution itself, in the hands
of those who are chosen and sworn to admin
lister it, by the direct interference, in form Of
law, of the States, in virtue Of their sovereign
capacity. The inherent right in the people TO
reform their government, do not deny; and
they have another right, and that is, to resist
unconstitutional laws, without overturnng the
l government. 1t is no doctrine of mine, that
unconstitutional laws bind the people. The
great question is, ich0se is the prer0gativc TO
decide on the eORstitUtiOnGlity, or uneOnStitn-
tiOnality, offhe iacs? On that, the main de.
bate hinges. The proposition, that in case of
a supposed violation of the constitution by Con-
|
interfere, and annul the law of Congress, is the
proposition of the gentleman | do not admit
it. If the gentleman had intended no more
than TO assert the right of revolution, for just-
fable cause, he would have said only what all
agree to. Bnt cannot conceive that there can
be middle course, between submission TO the
laws, when regularly pronounced constitution
all on the one hand, and open resistance, which
I is revolution, or rebellion, on the other. / SAY,
the right of State 10 annul law Of Congress,
cannot be maintained, but on the ground of the
uralienable right of man to resist oppression ;
that is to say, upon the ground of revolution
| admit, that there is an ultimate violent rem
edy, above the constitution, and in defiance Of
the constitution, which may DO resorted TO,
when revolution is to be justified But do
not admit, that, under the constitution, and in
conformity with ii, there is any mode in which
State Government, as a member of the Union,
can interfere and stop the progress of the Gem