Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-10-08
From the Lynchburg Virginian.

From the Lynchburg vrginan.
 The Kentucky Resolutions of 1799.-The Nulli- flyers of South Carolina mainly rely upon the reso- lutons presented to the Legislature of Kentucky in 1799, to sustain the doctrine of Notification; and by falsely imputing to Mir Jefferson the authorship of those resolutions, they lay claim to that veneraed Patriot as al advocate of that tratorous doctrine. The following is the sentence upon which the Null lies rely:
 " That the several states who formed that instru- ment, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionabe right to judge of it's nfracton, and that Notification by those soveregntes of all un- authorized acts done under the colour of that nstru ment, is the iightfnl remedy"
 Every man who can "tell hawk from handsaw" will perceive that the only analogy between the doc Urine affirmed by the foregoing extract and that asserted by portion of the South Carolina politi- cians, is, that they both the soord Notifications" for, as to its application they entirely differ No one doubts that the seUera States ,cho formed the constitution, "haue the unquestonable right to judge of it's infractions, and that Notification by those soUeretgntieS" of all unconstitutional acts lis the nghtfu remedy" But is it therefore true, as Messrs Calhoun, Hayne, &c. contend, that each State ,rho IS party to the constitution has this right? The Nullies are very fond of comparing the union to mercantile copartnership, and the States to indivi- duas composing the firm: Let us test this principle by their favor i,e mode of comparison. A. B. c. and D. enter into articles of agreement, as merchants and partners, and execute written copra~. dcG ing their respective rights and duties, and confdng the transaction of their joint business to an agent from which compact 1t results that they may at any time annu the acts of the agent whom they have emplOyed-does it thence follow that any of them may do this? Assuredy not; for if it did, then would any one member of the firm necessarily hold in his hands power greater than du the others So with the States. "Ih0se s0UerCignes" in the terms of the Kentucky Resolutions, hare the power to null an unconstitutional law of Congress-; but one of those sovereignes has no such power; else, that is invested with more potential rights, not only than either of their sister States, but than au cf them comb,ned; proposition, the startling absurdity of which must strike every man at single gance-a proposition, the admission of which would be tanta- mount to dissolution of the Union; for if il is to form the basis of national legislation. it is clear any mathematical demonstration can be, that the Union cannot last one year. But the subjoined ex- tract from the resolution, will show that the Legislature of Kentucky, in sanctionng the forego ing sentiment, did not attempt to assert the claim which is now ostentatiously set up by South Carol- na. On the contrary, in the very same breath in which they denounce the Alien and Sedition Laws unconstitutional they declare their determination to bow to them, although "hey would never to oppose them in c constitutional manner" And what did they regard a constitutional opposition7 Was it by setting up their decision as apthoritatve?- Was it by defying the laws and those who had sworn faithfully to execute them? Was it by declaring that they "had counted the cost of the Union" and found it's expressions overbaanced it's blessings2- Was it by avowing that "having exhausted the ar- gunnent, they would stand by their arms?"-NO, mo- thing of this reasonable character proceeded from that patriotic State; and it is equally foul islander, unnaturally so when it proceeds from any of her own offspring to assert that Virginia ever gave it the sanction of her unspotted name-a islander which the pen of Madison has effectually wiped from her escutcheon, and from which his venerable friend of Monticello, would be no less eager to vndicate her name, did he not sleep with the unforgotten dead- The Legislature of Kentucky declared
 "That also this Commonwealth, a. party to the federal compact, ,oM boao to the ta'os c the CnOn, yet it does at the same time declare, that 1t will not now nor never hereafter cease to oppose, m e Com stuiionaI ,xanner, every attempt from what quarter soever offered, to violate that compact-and fnay, in order that pretext or arguments may be drawn from supposed acquiescence on the part ol the Commonw in the econstitutionaty of those laws, and be thereby used as similar future violations of the federal compact this Commonwealth does now enter against them its SOLEMN PROTEST"
 But even if these resolutions did sanction the doc urine of Ratification, as defined by the South Caro- lima dsunionsts, still it would not enttle them to claim Mir Jefferson one of their fraternity-for hc soas not their autori In letter to Wilson Cary Nicholas, dated in September 1799 in reference to preparing something the subject to be laid before the then ensuing session of the Kentucky Legisla- ture, he expressly declined tt. They were, it is be- iieyed, prepared by John Breckenridge. Mir jeifer- prepared the resolutions adopted by the Legisla- lure of that State in 1798, and "they (says the En- quircr) do not contain the passage about notification, nor use the soord at au." The truth is, Mir Jeffer- sons character combine two qualities which render it morally certain, independent of the example fur nished by his whole life, that he never could have favored such monstrous doctrine-we mean pro- found wisdom and unsuspected patriotism. Such a man could have nothing to do with Modification. - The head or heart of him who advocates it must of necessity be wrong in relation to that subject-as soma men whom we occasionally meet wb are tona on most themes, but quite deranged on some particular subject. ..
 The Virginia Resolutions are just as far from countenancing the odious doctrine as are those of Kentucky. Indeed they were both the offspring of the same party and their sentiments were intended to be- as they are reflections of each other. By cu ling detached sentences from MT Mads0ns Report and Resolutions, forced construction may give to these sentences the sembance such meaning; but taken altogether they not only do not countenance but absolutely rsfWs the doctrine of Notification