Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1833-03-16

vests in the General Legislature power u
- make laws in matters nt national concern; 10
" appoint Judges to decide upon these laws; and
8. to appoint officers to carry them into execu.
ton. This excludes the idea OF an armed
=. force. The pnwer which is to enforce these
g. laws. is to be legal power. vested IN proper
{" magistrates. Tie furce which is to BE- employ
"ed, is the energy Of law; and this force Is to
operate only upon individuals. who IAN IN
=. their duty to their country. Ihls IS inc Pc
IS cuiiar glory of the constitution, that 1t de
" ponds upon the mild and equal energy OF
the nasislracy for the execution of the laws.
In the further course of the debate, Mr. Ellis
worth said
"In republics it is a fundamental prin
s. ciple that the maturity govern, and that the
:. minority comply with the general v"'ce. How
:. contrary, then, to republican principles, no"
=. Illuminating. is our present situation! A sin
+" gle State can rise up, and put veto upon the
" mast important public measures. We have
seen this actually take place: single State has
8. controlled the general voice of the Union: mi.
- noritv, a very small minority, has governed Us.
:. So far is this from being consistent with repub
s' lican principles, that it is in effect the worst
"specir> Of monarchy.
Hence we see how necessary Tor the Union
.. is coerciv. principle. No man pretends the
IS contrary. We all see and feel this necessity.
- The only question is, shall it be coercion OF
: law, or a coercion OF arms? there is no other
IS possible alternative. Where will those who
IS oppose coercion of Law come out? Where
&" will they end? A necessary consequence OF
- their principle is a war of the States one
g galnst another. am for coercion by law which
% acts only upon delinquent individuals This
'' Constitution does not at'enp' 10 coerce sove'
reign bndes, States, in their political capacity.
" No coercion is applicable to such bodies but
% that of an armed force. II we should attempt
to execute the laws of the Union, by sending
" an armed force against delinquent State. 1t
50 would involve the good and bad. the innocent
% guilty, in the same calamity. But this legal
- coercion singles out the guilty individual. and
s. Furnishes him for breaking the laws OF the Unit
- on -
Indeed, sir, if we look to all contemporary his
tory, to the writings Of the Federast, to the de.
bates in the conventions, to the publications OF
friends and fnes. they all agree, that change
had been made from a confederacy OF States. to
different system; they all agree that the con-
vpntiOn had formed constitution for National
Government. With this result, some were sa.
tsfied. and some were dissatisfied; but all ad'
mitted that the thing had been done. In none OF
these various productions and publications, did
any one intimate that the new constitution was
but another compact between States IN their so.
vereign capacities. do not find such an opni.
on advanced in single instance. Every where,
the people were told that the Old confederation
was to he abandoned, and new system to be
tried; that proper Government was proposed,
tn be founded in the name of the people, and to
have a regular organization of its own. Every
where, the people we're told that it was to be a
Government with direct powers to make laws
over individuals, and to lay taxes and inposts
without the consent Of the States. Every where,
it was understood to be popular constitution -
II came to the people for their adoption, and was
to rest on the same deep foundation as the State
constitutions themselves. Its most distinguished
advocates, who had been themselves members of
the convention, declared that the very object Of
submitting the constitution TO the people was,. to
preclude The possibility Of its being regarded as
a mere compact. "Hrwever gross heresy,"
SAY the writers of the Federast, cit NAV be to
maintain that party to compact has right to
revoke that compact, the doctrine itself has had
respectable advocates. The possibility OF ques.
ton of this nature proves the necessity of LAYING
the foundations of our National Government
deeper than in the mere sanction of Delegated au-
to rest on the solid basis of the CONSENT OF THE
PEOPLE"
Such is the language. sir, addressed to the Peo-
pie. while they yet had the constitution under
consideration. The powers conferred on the
new Government were perfectly we'll understood
to be conferred, not by any State, or the People
of any State, but BY the people Of the United
States. Virginia is more explicit. perhaps, in
this particular, than any other State Her con-
vention assembled to raIify the constitution "ln
the name and behalf of the people of Virginia, de-
clare aud make known, that the powers granted
under the. constitution being derived from the
people of The United States, may be resumed BY
them whenever the same shall be perverted to
their injury or oppression. %
Is this language which describes the formation
of compact between States. or language describ-
ing the grant Of porers 10 a nev Government,
by the ,chole people of the United STATES?
Among all the other notifications, there is not
one which speaks of the constitution az com.
pact between States. Those Of Massachusetts
mi N.,y n snhire eynrpss the transar finn in