Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-11-06
DOMESTIC.
SOUTH CAROLINA.

CHARLESTON, October u.
Adjournment of the Eegisiature.-The Legislature all
journed yesterday, the 10Th instant, TO meet again on the
fourth Monday in November next. A full account of the
proceedings to the hour of adjournment will DO found in
our paper this evening.-Pdsri0t
A part OF Mr.. Webster's Speech, delivered before the
Worcester Convention, is cited in the Mercury, in which
he is said to have expressed himself to the following eff
feet. Speaking of Notification, he warned the people ' to
see TO it, lest some resistance TO the authority of the Go.
vernment was not made the pretext for the exercise Of a
military potCer that tcoutd place all their rights IN je0-
pardy." This sentence is quoted TO show the opinion OF
Mr.. Webster, as 10 Executive coercion in case a State
utilities an Act OF Congress. Now, Mi. Webster is a
party man, and will of course use all arguments by which
he can effect party ends. One OF these IS, TO prevent the
reelection Of Gen. Jackson. and il he can persuade the
people OF the United States that their liberties are in dan.
ger from the possible abuse OF the Executive power, he
will not hesitate TO use this or any other argument, to eff
feet his purpose. But how does this sentiment OF Mr.. Web
ster agree with another part OF his speech, in which
he severely censures General jackson, for not eDorc
ing the late decision Of the Supreme Court, in the
case of the Missionaries imprisoned in Georgia. How
was this decision to be enforced, if not by Executiv,
coercion? How was Georgia TO be coerced, unless by "oI
exercise Of military Potcerr" Would the "rigbts of tn,
people" be more Sin jeopardy" from the application of
military force in Georgia, TO enforce the observance of
treaty, than in South Carolina, to enforce the observanc,
OF a Law? There is an evident contradiction here. Blu
our purpose was not TO show that even great statesmen, il
the pursuit OF party ends, forget sometimesto be consistent
supposing that MIR. Webster took for granted that Gen
jackson was TO proceed against a State without the pre-
vious sanction OF Congress.
We notice this opinion of Mr.. Webster to dissent from
the inference which has been drawn from it, to rende
Ueh' JACKSON Unpopular III Uls Sate, Indl the ChleI ma
gistrate will proceed forthwith to coerce a State tcithOu
the previous sanction Of Congress. How are the ex
penses of a military expedition, suppose one employed, {
be betrayed? Can Gen. Jackson apply the money in tn
Treasury in hostile operations, without a previous appro
priation, unless the urgency OF the case will admit OF II
delay? Mr.. Webster has proceeded on a mere party pre-
sumption, that Gen. Jackson would overlap all the bar
riers of the Constitution, and make wa at the very mo
ment that Congress is in session, TO arm him with powe
for the purpose. Yet it is Dir. Websler's doctrine tha
Gen. Jackson should employ the military arm Of tn
Union to coerce Georgia, anI does mot Jln@a tL-Ass, nUw
y mover auvanced an opinion against the competenc
oil congress TO coerce a State, in case of an intraction ,
the laws oil the Union, whatever may be his opinions
relation to the powers Of the Federal Executive in sue