Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1833-08-01

''''E "ho are As warmly opposed TO H. who be.
'e'eu II CONSTITUTIONAL yeta great abuse OF eoesti-
eeo"a power. But all united IN making ~ az up
- JUSTIFY hhilihcaiion or secession, on ac
- u Il ''tih, us nneonstltut.ooalt,y must be
nadc manifest because the exercise of fbesc na,v
efs by asiae Is based upon t..ipa5l. ai,l,,t add
'''s''o"s attractions OF the constitution To
muse VINO MAINTAIN these opinions OF SIN ,le state
o"eis, TINS POINT Is vital and do NOT th,re-
~ ""'.ef al the z2al with which IL Is urged nor
- '"o" opposition to every one who does not 20
~ ""o,e 'ehsth OF their views. But Mutiu,"
argues this charge as If the members of th =.
- "'''e opinions vote IN accordance with his
9"'i were tue whole bo1y. ! havu ma l,oht H.,
ihe'o WIS majority OF members, enteflainino on.
P2S"c seotments, asmbnns the advocate, o. the Ia
IN uhu those WHO opposed II on ihe same c,arnd
VIM VT Rve3, AID It Is certainly snt IL. n g,e.,
oea' 10 eha'Gc Mr.. Rlves with nisrcpfe4ent,pe IN,
views otthc Legislature, h ciase he des,..I -.
portion OF ITS members. MIR Rives's on,ni,,s mon
IN SUBJECT OF the arltf have been con @Istent and
us course OF opposition uniform. HIS soe.rhrs
"e'e before the pah, milf 18th all tlless evidences
"'' taemi opinions Wee dserlbrd - INN which
nc 'eVef entertained, tie Is not fesIons b. fli II No
man deems II necessary Or proper to max, an an
nual expose Of hls poIiliee ,f,ed
oh tue SUBJECT ol internal improvement Nnliu,
admlts thu Mr.. Ryes WIS orthodox in IS ~. and
~ - '1 'I'IhlHt'l 10 tic
over tins sunsa by ,he General Government But
~ wlslire to know what hls opinions IN 1884
dntIus says ,aayng reference 70 t. previous letter
5"lireS5fdb by Inn 10 Nh. kves through The Enani-
Ter, - Among the queries recently addressed to
ua ton ~ Hiram {. Rlyes inquired whether hc
thought Congress possessed the power To slrnct
works oil internal Improvement Ia answer 10
this enquiry Mutiuso was rcferrcl to two ofNr
t'e>s speeches Whilst member OF the House of
, Representatives, IN o3 II aud '2Go1 I'm rqnlv
- ths, Mutus says" rcd The speeches alluded to
shortly after their publication, oa3 as d1Se spsceh
Is atd net inform uS tchat tcouR be N. Rirefs
gP'' 'ofS ~ 1888, thought that the query oton5nn
! atd was quite appropriate" Il is true thc speecl
e ss ad not inform Motius' whit would be MIR
N'Ve' opinion on this subject in 1888 but they
aaolHVos Any ahcwed whot lbs opinous were
aen and every man would reasonably presume
that he snl nantaincd thu same opinions. unless
he mad aso"od 4 change, OF done some act eyineing
a ch"'',e Tins III has not done aud the water
, 70 Wei saislisJ, in Iced he knows that Mr.
itNsss opinions are the same in 1888 as IN % "a
and 1927
Aatus' does not seem 70 be ignoran, Of Mr.
l'VeS Opinions upon the subject OF notification
HIS opposition To thls doctrine WIS nyowed in the
jei'c' before referred to, and fsthf1y las he e,in-
ed has sincerity for IN his spe.eA so much repro
GATED by - Mu'ius he hs7 proved, with mathe-
ntricA pree's on, It's ute. ialncy
- Aiutlee' says he cannot stter aitenlivcly read
NJ MI .sf,-coh, ssc-rt,u lrpni any s-nlm,n
( which II oontslns what Mr. Il ves's opinion OF
the right OF secession, aud says he would be glad II
any Que Suuld des snate that portion OF nv II yeas
speech, where he right o, secession is named
WILL uadeftsk, the task and " i'll sa,ify Natlus"
rs II fhat the spc, Gu most une luivocul and
| ma nj i jGnDtl otthis right us contcudrd for
maxi the expression , by the south Carolina
school OF politicians Blu before proceed 10 el,c
] the answer, permit M 10 ca9a.rc of i" Mutius"
himself why he rep obsles the speech II il IS no,
opposed 70 this doctrine Is II because it is op-
posed 10 nnHid=R ? do not think he vii al
mt tbs Is 1t because 1t contains sentiments OF
nnco prom,i n.. hostility l., the American system,
THIS will not do Is he opposed 10 Mr. Rvcs be-
cause Mr. Riyes is opposed TO the United States
bank. and the power of internal improvements
No; this cannot b. the cause What then 1t
must be because the speech maintains doctrines
aai advocates a policy, which Mutus' believes
opposed 10 the right OF sion.-Is mol this the
reason why Mutius has called Mr. Ryes an apps.
t,te from his principles, sligmatized him rs a fed
.,alist. and pIsccd him in the same ranks with
Daniel Webster. the hish priest offeder4lism7 Is
not this the reason why all the notification and
secession presses, together with the nuf-rs and
scceders, unathemcti1c hm II thus is not the
cause, what is i'll But viii return, and directly
perform the task which hnve undertaken which
is to prove that Mi. Rircs's speech contains an un
equiyottl and direct expression Of opinion, upon
the subject of secession liza single state mey Sc
cedr from the Union, whenever she deems the cnusc
efficient, ii necessarily follows, that her original
sovereignty is not diminished and that her citizens
cannot be acted upon by the Federal government
and the government cannct enfofc" the execution OF
the laws, within the borders OF that state his
would strip the ohheh states o' MI o'e'e's"'y'
even oT. the granted powers OF inc constitution
Mr.. Rfvcs has negstlved all these propositions,
AMI siirmS tie follo~lng, which are clearly at war