The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1831-1858, 1832-12-19

legally snnui decision of the Congress- =. refuse
10 submit to is execution but no provision was
made 80 eliorce these decisions. Congress made
acquisitions, but they not complied with.
The Government could not operate upon individu-
ais. They had no Judiciary, no means of collect
ing revenue.
But the defects Of the confederation need not
be detailed Under its operation We could scarce
ly be called nation. We had neither prosperity
nj home nor consideration abroad This state OF
things could not be endured, and our present hap
py Constitution was formed. but formed IN VAIN, If
this fatal doctrine prevails. 1t was formed for n-
portant objects that are announced in the pTram-
bile made in the name and by the authority Of the
people of the United States. whose delegates franz
ed, and whose conventions approved it, The mos,
important among these objects that which is piac /
ed first IN rank, which all the others rest, is to
form more perfect Union'' Now, is it possible
that even II there were express provision giving
supremacy to the Constitution and laws Of the
United States over those Of the States-can IT he
conceived, that an instrument made for the pur-
pose oil " forming more peutc! Union" than
that OF the confederation, could be SO constructed
by the assembled wisdom of our country to sub
stltuie for that confederation form Of government
dependent for its existence on the local interest,
the party spirit Of a State, Of a prevailing fac
ton IN State Every man of plain, unsophistr-
Gated understanding. who hears the question, will
give such an answer as will preserve the Union.
Metaphysical subtlety, in pursuit Of Impractical
Bile theory. could alone have devised that is
calculated to destroy it.
consider, then, the power 10 annul law Of the
United States, assumed by State incompatible
,c;h the erisence Of the Union, contrad;ctsd er-
Pressiy by the letter Of the Constitution ,mdusor
sed by ITS spirit Inconsistent trih ereTg principle
on which it tcdS foLaded, aud destructive Of the
great object for tchich it ,cds formed.
Alter this general view of the leading principle
we must examine the particular application OF it
which is made in the Ordinance.
The preamble rests its Justification or these
grounds 1t assumes as fact, that The obnoxious
laws, although they purpcrt To be laws tor raising
revenue, were in reality intended ior the pro'ec-
ton OF manufactures, which purpose it asserts to
be unconstitutional that the operation OF these
laws is unequal that the amouht raised by them
is greater than is required by the wants OF the gov
eminent and finally, that the proceeds are to be
applied to objects unauthorized by the ConSttu-
ton. These are the only causes alleged TO justify
an open opposition to the laws OF the country, and
threat of seeding from the Union, If any attempt
should be made to enforce them. lie hrst Vlrtu-
ally acknowledges, that the law in question was
passed under power expressly given by the Con-
stitutIon to lay and collect nposIs but It's const-
tatioaality is drawn in question from the nrotireS
! of those who passed it. However apparent this
purpose may be in the present case, nothing can be
more dangerous than to admit the position that an
unconstitutional purpose, entertained by the mem
! beers who assent to law enacted under constitu-
| tionai power shall make that law void for how is
! that purpose to be ascertalned! Who is TO make
/ the scrutiny! How often may bad purposes be
| falsely impuled-in how many cases are they con-
| cealed by false professionalism how many Is no
declaration of motive made Admit this doctrine.
and YOU give to the States uncontrolled right TO
/ decide and every law may be annulled under this
| pretex; If, therefore, the absurd and dangerous
J doctrine should be admitted, that State may an
| nul an unconstitutional law, one that IT deems
/ SUCH it will not apply TO the present case
/ The next objection is that the laws in question
| operate unequally This objection may be made
] =. 81 -. ha
| passed. The wisdom Of man never vet contrIyed
a system of taxation that would operate with per-
( feet equality If tie unequal operation of law
makes it unconstitutional, and if all laws of that
description may be abrogated by any State for that
4 Cause then indeed is the Federal Constitution un-
\ worthy of the s ghtest effort for It's preservation.
We have hitherto relied on it the perpetual bond
| of our Union. We have received it as the work
! of tile assembled wisdom of the nation We have
trusted to it as the sheet anchor of safety in
! the stormy times of conhlct with foreign DO
mestic foe. We have looked 10 it with sacred awe
! the palladium Of liberties, and with all the
solemnites Of religion have pledged TO each other
our lives and fortunes here, and our hopes OF hap
piness hereafter in its defence and support. Were
we mistaken, my countrymen, in attaching this
importance 10 the Constitution Of our country
Was our devotion paid TO the wretched inefficient
clumsy contrivance. which this new doctrine woulC
make it Did we pledge ourselves to the supper
of an airy nothing, bubble that must be blow
away by the first breath of Justification Was TIN
sef-destroying, visionary theory, the work OF tbs
f profound statesmen, the exalted patriots 10 whom
the task of constitutional reform entrusted
, Did the name of Washington sanction, did tn
States deliberately ratify, such an anomaly in tn
history Of fundamental Legislation No. We wer,
not mistaken The letter of This great instrun4en
is fee from this radical fault its language direct
ly contradicts the imputation its spirits evi
dent intent contradicts it. no. we did not err
Our Constitution does not contain the absurdity o
giving power to make laws, and another power Il
: resist them. The sages whose memory will al
ways be reyerenced hare given a practical. ana
as they hoped, permanent constitutional compact
The Father OF his country diS not aiix his revere,
to so pllpahle an absurditv. Nor did tn
States, when they seyerally ratified it, do unde
the impression that veto the laws of the Unit
ed States reserved TO them, or that they coul
exercise it by implication. Search the debates il
all their CoRveRtlnns-examin ne the speeches of In
most Jealous opposeIs of Federal authority-looI
at the amendments that proposcd--they arr
all sileut-nDt syllable uttered, not veie gwen
not motion made to correct the explicit suprema
cy given to the laws Of the Union over those o
the Staies-or to show that implication, as is nov
! contended, coulG defeat it. No. we have not err
ed Tic Constitution is still the object of gu
reverence, the bond Of our Union, defence il
r dagger the source Of our prosperity in peace.
shall descend have received it, urfcorrupte.
by sophstical construction, 10 our posterity an,
the sacrifices of local interest of State p9eudees
of personal animosities that made to brn,
y INTO existence viii again be palrotcally ocIe
, for Its support.
ri The two remaining objections made by the Or
dinance to these laws that the sums intended Il
be raised by them are greater than arc required
and that the proceeds will be unconstitutional
, employed
, The Constitution has given expressly to Con
gross TIC right Of raising and Of determin
ing the sum the public c1igences will require
, The States have control over the exercise @
this right other than that which results from III,
power Of changing the Representatives w.o abuse
IT, and thus procure redress. Congress may m
doubtedly abuse this discretionary power but thu
same may be said Of others with which they al,
vested Yet the discretion must exist somewhere
The Constitution has given it to the Representa-
tives Of all the people checked by the Representa-
tives of the States, and by the Executive power
The South Carolina construction gives it to the
Legislature the Convention of single State
where neither the people Of the different States
nor the States in their separate capacity, nor the
Chief Magistrate elected by the people, have any
! representation. Which is the most discreet dispo-
sltion Of this power? do not ask YOU fellow cit.
l:ens, which is the constitutional dispoziton-that
instrument speaks language not to be mlSunder-
stood. But # you were assembled in general con-
| vention which would you think the safest deposit
DRY OF this discretionary power in the last resort
! would you add clause giving it to each Of the
| states or would You sanction the wise provisions
| already made by your Constitution II this should
| be the result OF your deliberations when providing
Tor the future, YOU can you be ready To risk all
that we hold dear, to establish for a Temporary and
| local purpose that which you must acknowledge
| to be destructive and even absurd rs - general
| provision Garry out the consequences of this