Southern planter., 1832-12-22

n
government are derived from he custom house, il
Is evident, that there would be nearly iossl fail
uro Of The revenue. Other evils, equally great,
would ensue. Every holder Of duliable articles
purchased under the tarin, would find them reduced
In value, 10 the amount Of the duties winch had
been paid on them. Shp-owners, land-holders,
merchants, artisans al the Inhabitants Of our other
large cities, who owe their prosperity subsistence
10 foreign commerce, would be exposed to ruin and
begqary. All the dependent agricultural districts
would participate in the shock In the money mar
kei which is sosensiive TO every political and COM
mercial vIcissltude, confidence would be destroy
ed, private credit would be suspended, public cred
it- would be menaced--emharrassme and bank
ruptcy would peryade the land. is il reasonable
70 expect that The other members Of the conieder-
acy will permit such state OF things 10 conun
ue, or even 10 commencei II every party TO the
compact "has an equal right to Judge Tor ITSELF as
well OF inlraclons as Of the mode and measure Of
redress" surely this IS a case in which the major
ity would not fail 10 exercise their privilege. F.
ven states in the minority, deprecalug such wild
career of political innovation, would at least not
disapprove the measures by which i was arrested.
According to the latitude Of choice, conceded by
The fundamental principles Of the nulli6efs, the
majority might, in these circumstances, adopt any
mode Of proceeding, which seemed most eNpedi-
ent. The reasonable presumption however Is, that
the most obvious, gentle, andeieciual plan would
be selected--ihat Of Immediately blokading all the
ports which had been made free. II the nulhiying
state did not then submit, il must resist by force,
and the very FIRST blow would be the commencement
ofcivil war. Il is supernuous to enquire, by what
species Of political agency, the majority Of states
would, in the present instance, perform this lnds-
pensibe duty Of self defence. They would doubt
less without any reference 70 new tangled theories,
act through the insrumeniality Of the general gov
ernment, whose direction IS in their hands. An OBJ
lection from any quarter, 10 tins mode OF opera
ton, would be unreasonable: but coming from the
nulIfes-those who claim for all parties, an equal
right 10 Judge Of aihe mode and measure Of red
Tess,n il would be supremely ridiculous,
From the premises we think ourselves suihoriz
ed to conclude that the believers in the doctrine Of
nullifcaiion, labour under an extreme delusion--
that the pretensons any majority exceeding one
fourth, to impose its construction Of the consiitu
tion on a majority, in the highest degree chmer-
ical--ihat those who resort TO notification as a
peaceful remedya are rushing blndfold into HOSTILE
iios.--The nullifeFs have spoken of the natural
right ofparties, each 10 interpret compact for il.
self as ifit were a constitutional right, whose ex-
ercise is compatible with the maintenance Of COM
the mere privilege Of mutual warfare In specu-
atne on the Interpretation Of the constitutions they
entirely forgot that the states which ratified this in
slrument, adopted itasG whole, and as much forthe
sake ofihe powers, which they supposed il to con-
fer on the general government, as for the sake Of
those which they supposed to reserve 10 the states
individually They forget, that the opinion
Of any state, believing power to have been
delegated is entitled to as much consideration as
the opinion Of another gfate believing il TO have
been reserved d-Finally, they forget, that in every
disputed case, where there was a variance in the
original understanding Of the parties, the intentions
of one side or the other must necessarily be Jrus
srdted; and that this unavoidable Inconvenience
may as properly be endured by sevon as by seven
ieon-by any minority, as by any majority.
When there is material, and ireconcablc diff.
ference ofopinion, between the parties to the Fed
eral Compact, il is manifest, that secession is the
only ehectual remedy for the weaker. It has in
deed been maintained, that the right Of secession
itself, is only the right ofnulliiyng the whole con-
slitution and laws Those who are mIsled by such
an assertion, can have paid but little attention TO
the import Of the words. Notification isrepresen-
ted as an act performed under the constitution,
and compatible with the continuance Of the gen
ofal government Secession on the contrary, as is
implied by the very term, dissoves the government
releasing those who, secede, from the obligations of
che compact. To call secession, therefore, spe
cies Of notification, is mere solecism. But il is
farther urged, that admitting the two measures to
be essentially different; the scheme Of notification
can at worst only eVentuate in the other and in tho
mean time is more gentle in its operation This
is a most peFnicious ialacy. Whenever secession
is unequvoeally proposed ihepeople, The datdw
bo firly before them--thsy will choose, with full
knowledge Of the aliernatiges--ihey will decide
their deslinyin open day. But when notification
is recommended TO them, as being, in fact, one Of
the best means Of preserving the Union, (notwith-
standing we have seen that It is decidedly the re-
veTseD lfthey credit such representation, they
have not the true data before them-they are de-
Gliding upon premises absolutely false, and maypre
cipitale themselves into a revolution. when their
purposes are diametrically opposite. The claims Of
nuhhcohon 70 greater genileness Of process, are
equally futile lfthe Southern States, impeled by
their wrongs, should, through Convention, OF in
any other manner, propose to the majority, that the
Union be dissolved by common consent; either
those wrongs will be re,lressed, or their propo-
aillon will be accepted; for no rational man will
cherish The desperate project ofretaining them in
the Union BY force. The parties would arrange