Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-04-16
POLITICAL.
SENATOR TYLER'S MlSCONSTRUCTION OF
THE PROCLAMATION

attempting to make party against the President upon the
petence that his proclamation the principles the
Old Federal party, than the fact their being obliged TO
MPTesen The doctrines OF the paper in question: when
ever 'hey refer to it, to maintain their declarations Sena
/ Ur Nier, IN his Gloucester speech, says:
line is not allowed do more than TO invite Your
attention to one Of these doctrines, advanced from his II
quarter aud openly maintained in deba,ethat doctrine
"hlch claims Tor the Federal GOvernment-IliE EXcLU-
slvE ALLEGIANCE OF THE cITIzEN-a doctrine which
embraces every question heretofore held in dispute be-
tween the parties OF this country and successfully main
tanned, overihrowng all that has ever been connded for
by tie great republican party"
Is this true! Does the proclamation "clam for the Fe
der"l Government the exclusive allegiance of the c-
Zen Z! Nothing i. further from The truth. W give the
whole passage from the proclamation which Mr.. Ty-
Ter engraied his ialacious Interpretation:
The States severaly have entire sore
Te'g"ty II has been shown tina, in becoming parts of
hatlo not members OF league, they surrendered many
Of their essential parts of sovereignty The right 10 make
;reaties-decare war-levy taxes-exercise exclusive
judicial and legislative powers, all hem functions
oil sovereign power The States, then for all the mpor-
ant purposes, were no longer soveregn.-The allegiance
OIL helr citizens was transferred IN the first instance to
the Government of the United States and TO laws made
IN conformity with the powers il vested in Congress This
iast PoSIoh mas not Deem and cannot he denied How
then that State be said be sovereign and ndepen
dent, whose citizens owe obedience laws not made by
H. ana whose magistrates sworn TO DISREGARD those
laws when they come in conflict with those passed by
another: What shows concusvrly that the States can.
not De salu 10 have reserved undivided SoUereigniv
Is that they expressly coded the right TO punish
nor treason against their separate potrer-but trea-
son against the United States. Treason is an offence
against SOVeTetSHty, aud sovereignty
e power 10 punish it. But the reserved rights of the
States are not less sacred because they have for their com
mon interest made the General Government tIa lcnoso
ry OF these powers"
This passage in the Proclamation does not iusirv the
Inference Of Nlr Tyler, that it claims THE EXcLUs1vr
ALLEGIANCE Tor the Federal Government. II closely
examined The Inference must be directly reversed The
Proclamation assumes that the allegiance of the citizen
IS due TO S0uereigntyor, the terms are explained i'm
he same passage, the citizens owe obedience" to the
dWhmty " Government-tIat is, "to the Id,cs made i'm
c0'UWMy tch PoIcerS UeSed" in it. But the whole e-
nor oil the passage contradcts the idea that entire soy
reighty belongs 10 either the State or Federal Govern
ment And as the principle maintained is that aeei
atce and F." obcdience,' (phrases used indscrinnaie
y) are due to the divided duhoriy' or sovereign-
IT,, as conferred upon tho State or Federal Govern
ments by the people, it follows, that exclusive allie.
glance can be due to neither. The argument of the
PROCLAMATION asserts, chat the States be said to have
reserved an undivided sovereignty" because "ey er-
PFeSSty ceded The right to PuHi treason
against Their separate Potoer ii goes say; but Urea
SON against the United States" Here is an eyn,ess re
cognuon that treason may be committed agains; the sepa
rate power oil the Staesand that the constitutional power
10 punish treason conferred the General Government
does not extend TO treason OF that class ITeason avs
Tue Pocamaon) Is an offence against soyereigniv',
cordingly, obedience is due eachand that the
to punish Tor treason against the respective soFeregue
pperains alike TO he separate po0er or separate Gov
ernments recognized by the Constitution.
MIR. Tyler cannot find word in the Proclamation on
which lac can lay hold justify his declaration that sex
elusive allegiance is claimed for the General Government
and have shewn that the whole tsior OF lis argu
ment is against his assertion.
But Mr.. Tyler for want of other evidence TO support
the doctrine imputed to the President, brings up another
misrepresentation to support the first He says
"ThI doctrine Of ercSiUe allegiance is but the result
OF that other doctrine which has been contended for 50
strenuousy by certain party in this country, from the
day that the Federal Government put in notion viz
That the Constitution tcGS not The result of compact
among the States, separate communities and indie
pendent soUereignties, but tcas the ,eo Of the people,
If was the work OF the people, acting whole then
ii obvious that the whole that entire mass was the
sole sovereign, and, OF course hat entire tile to the
allegiance OF each and every individual within the broad
limits Of the Union"
ia this part OF his speech, Mr.. Tyler gave his con-
stuens TO understand that the Proclamation mainsine,
the doctrine tha "He constitution tCds nat the result NJ
compact among The States separate communities anI
independent S0reTeigHtieS but the iCOTk of the DeO
Piej and upon the assumption that the Proclamation thu
traces the origin OF the Federal Government to "he peo
PIE acting as who'll AN ENTIRE MASS" he make
the deduction that the President claims "erclire al
Lcgtdnce IN behalf OF the General Government Both t
tacIs assumed by Mr. Tyler in this statement are not on
~ not warranted by any ding to hc found in The paper
be found III the paper which Ge refers buits evident
from tho decisive and express language that the
are falsely assumed. The Proclamation, in more place
Tran one declares explicitly that tie constitution original
ed in coMPAcr-and, further, that this conpact was In
work OF Tie people through Their respective State Logis
laures-and that the ratification adoption of the eonsii
tuition also The act .! the people OF the separate States
acting through Separate State Conventions" All this
expressed IN The following bnel passage OF the Pocama
ton:
CHE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES roRME1
! THE CoNsTtlUTloN, ACTING THROUGH THE STAT
AND DISCUSS IT'S PROVISIONS, AND ACTING IN sFPA
RATS Conventions WHEN They RATIFIED THos
PRovIsGoNs."
IN other parts Of this paper the idea is advancet
In argHng the question Oi secession The declaration hs
the Union was formed by compact, is hus repea ed:>
"Becsuse the Uaion FORMED ny COMPACT, il
SAID the parties TO at compact may when they feel heu
selves aggri, we'd depart buti precisely BEcA Us
IT Is 4 COMPACT that they cannot A compact is q
agreement bind ng obligation. / may, by its tlrn
have sanction penalty breach or may not
In various other passages oil this paper aud in varot
forms OF argument hc doctrine is asserted that the Fed,
raj Government IS founded n compict-was created b
the people of the Uni ell states distinct communities
SHcssnd not ente mass; and il further recognize
the principle ongraf Cd IN the Constitution, that il can ol
be amended tered by the Of these States as s,
% pdrats independent communities.
Mr. lyle can furnish jus idcs;on Tor his course
misrcpeseung the opinions Of the President 10 his cor
sduens lie knew that the spurious interpre taton o N
Proclamation, which he sought TO palm his cousttuen
FOR fair and honest illustration OF it, principles, has =
warrant IT. its teX and hal other occasions unjust il
ereuces Of the same character had been repealed by III
authority Of The President, who expressly disayowed N
opinions thus imputed 10 him. Gl0be.
n from tho Lynchburg Vtrginian1
10 COMMISSION DENCE-NfR. CLAY AND HIS CON
10 PROMISE.
Some weeks ago, published the proceedings Of
meeting held al New Glasgow, thanking Mr. Clay Tor h
successful efforts 10 adjust the dsirdctng questions whic
divided tho country, and threatened subver our ham