Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-01-22
Virginia Legislature.
DEFERRED DERgTE
III.
HOUSE OF LEGATES,-TueSdaV Jan 10.

I
Mr.. hIeCamant said he had intended at am earlier day
express his views this subject at ageBut lac had
yielded to others ADLER than himself aud who had said
more than he could have said But he now rose not to
debate the questions offered 10 the consideration of the
House, but TO TO strike the whole of the 7th re-
solution. ii the House should 10 strike ont this re-
solution il would he declaration that they still plac con-
Gdcnce in the President of the United Staes-a man
whom Mr. Nee had uniformly supported under all cir
cumsanccs and who had emphacally filed the measure
of his countrys glory He asked the ayes and noes on
the question
MIR. Mcdowell said that many things had been s,rick
out OF the resolutions to which he assened and many
retained TO which he opposed In this instance he
should be forced to vote for striking portions which
met his concurrence in order get rid of others which
were Objectionable. Had the It'll resolution been dis
membered, he should have been able to have voted on
the several propositions separately but obliged to vote
on the whole, his views OF the question OF secession
would oblge him TO vote against the resolution
The question was then put and decided in the negative
as formerly stated.
Mr. Faulkner asked whether the resolution was now
open TO amendment
The Speaker said it not
Mr. Campbell said he rose TO offer amendment which
would put the question OF secession proper footing
The point to be settled OF greatest Importance was what
was meant by secession The motion he made would
require the House to say distinctly whether
or not revolutionary right He then read his reso.
luton Gas published in the Enquirer OF Thursday which
he moved to insert alter the 9Th resolution the Commit
tee.
The House would perceive that this resolution brought
the question TO the point which he had the outset
The Ordinance OF South Carolina founded upon the
principle, that State had the right TO secede from the
Union at her will and pleasure The same doctrine
interable from the 7h resolution OF the Select Conn
mee when taken in come ion with the commentaries
afforded by the speeches of its supporters IL wished 10
know whether the House intended to affirm such mon
strous doctrine III they did, il ought be explicitly
avowed, AMI not left TO Implication. il now was by the
ambiguous language OF that resolution. Although he AL,
mcd that the Ordinance and that resolution did not in so
many words that State had a right to seccle al its
own will and pleasure set forth in The resolution now
submitted ystit claimed for the States that they were
be the sole Judges the cause which was eouvaen,
al oh IN If
suiciency OF the provocaon, them or 10 cause
right or wrong they might secede. Any within Or ca
deemed sufficient Ifthese tho opinions OF the House
he wished our constituents and the world TO know it,
Mr. Brown OF Petersburg said, he believed il was tho
general impression in the House that the subject Of seces
sion ought not to be further acted upon; and he regretted
that the proposition under consideration had been submit
ted; but vote upon unavoidable unless were
Withdrawn, he would avail himself OF the occasion very
briefly, 10 explain the views this matter which he had
presented more at large lew days before, and which
had been misapprehended by He should merely
state the conclusions TO which he had come without re-
peang the course OF reasoning which had brought him
TO them. He had maintained that the Federal Cons,itu-
ton was compact TO which the States parties in
their sovereign capacity. He had laid il down as A rule
OF the law OF nations that when compact was formed
between sovereigns there resulted each perfect right
TO compel the other TO perform its promises IL was an
equally unquesonabe rule that the violation of perfec,
right, in other words breach of the compact was
good cause OF war; but whether under any given cir.
cumstances there had or had not been a violation
OF the compact was matter of which such sove-
reign party must OF necessity Judge for ITSELF and even
where the party believed there had been an iniracton
by the other create good cause of war il was
sun discretionary whether coercion SHOULD be resoed
From these premises il followed that there were but two
modes in which the compact could he dissolved; or in
other words but two cases in which State could secede
In the first place the compact might terminated y the
mutual consent of all the parties as was the case with The
articles Of confederation. In the second place where
there had been wiliu and material breach OF the com.
pact by one party the other party had right 10 consider
the compact as at an end This resulted not from the
Servaion made in the ratification OF the Constitutions by
Virginia nut from general principle OF national law,
wmch would have equally conferred the right, though
there had been such reservation IL was evident
that lie considered the right to secede in this Latter
case, not as perfect right, subsisting at all times but
as contingent in its birth and wholly depen,Ient on
The fact OF a wilful and material violation of the COM
pact whether Tie right did did exist, depend
ed on whether there had had not been an infracton
which, according to the law of nations must be wIl and
MATERIAL in order 10 justify withdrawal from the COM
pact As there was common arbiter among sovereigns
each party must Judge for itself whether contingency
ON which the right to secede depends had occurred aud
oil course whether the right had ed It was of con-
sequence 10 distinguish between the right of each party
Judge Tor Itself, aud right in the Of things right
TO Judge Tor ITSELF meant nothing than that the State
was sovereign Each party might at he same time hav.
right to judge for itself but there could not at the same
ume be right in one party secede and right i'm the
other party to prevent it, Right and justice could in the
nature OF things, be only side, but the parties
might der III opinion as TO where they lay. The difficult
y was in ascerIaning whether the right had occurred:
ana OF TINS each party must Judge, with other restraint
'ah tose nigh moral obligations which upon all sove-
reign powers, to do justice heir fellows If one party
should admit that il had violated the comnaot vviliuy
ana materially could not but admit that the other party
hau right alter the failure of every constitutional means
oil redress, TO be absolvei from ITS obligations There
might however, be cases, in which, even admitting The
right III the abstract the State aggrievcd would not be al
lowed TO wilhdaw-as for instance where an ade sion
was manlestIy necessary the safety and happiness of
me othcr Sates and under circumstances would the
exercise oil the right be permitted until the terms of the
separation and the uture relations of the parties had been
seUed satisfactorily by negotiation. IT, the her hand
the one party should believe that il had not committed t
Il III
sell entitled to compel adhesion-a right which il
hght ehcr waive or enforce at its discretion He said
nc dId not comprehend the meaning of a peaceabe rpht
o secession III II meant right TO dissolve the compact
d VIII ana pleasure, II clearly incompatible with the
principle he had laid down II it meant that there were
cases IN winch he one party should allow the other peace
"Oiy 10 Sccede, II confusion of terms i'm which
gh On the other hand he did not pui secession on ,
loog OF rebellion Or revolution The latter he understood
10 Oe resistance by fractional part of one integral consoI
u"ed nouy poc, against The established authorities which
was punishable according TO the municipal laws
reason" ne former was the act, whether right wrsng of
sovereign, which, whatever restraints NAV have existed
during the continuance of the compact is entitled mon
the remuneration of that compact TO be treated as sn
reign, and to be punished punished at ALL according IN
inc usages oil war, under the law Of nations I'm the case
OF revolutions the established authorities must decide
"heher The complaint OF the rebels is iust and whether
Cohces IONS snail be made, whether the insurrce
non shah be suppressed. In the of secession the
IKE judgment must be made, by the one party in refer
hce 70 me Oher party abogatng the compact otherwise
h1n oy common consent. The circumstances which
would JUSTLY tile one would Justify the other being in
either case pcrverson Of the powers vested il the GOV
eminent, or usurpoion of powers not vested IN te in
oIeFaole oppression and injury Of the parties The oui