Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-01-26

same people nad also adopted the State Constitutions
yet no one doubted their competency 10 resume the pow
ers conferred in this case, whenever they pleased. He
thought That the sovereignty OF the States still resided in
the people OF the States. and that the State Governments
as their organs, would be found in adequate
their protection. He did why the people of State
should nterpose through convention 20 councrval
nen unless thcinojec this right Of secession
He thought that there sufficient means OF protection
to the States without resorng TO this process OF nuca
lion secession.
How did Virginia nterposc in 90? Not by seeding
from the Union-nor by multiplying the Sedition Act The
General Assembly provided by law, "a few days after
the adoption OF their resouons that prosecuted
under the Scdion Act, Should be released by Hdbeds
Corpus, ON application 10 State Judge. Here the
harity OF ordinary law nterposed efectua
shield TO the citizen against the oppression OF the Fec
raj Government There had been frequent instances Of
State interPositon IL had sometimes failed and some
times succeeded. The result apt 10 depend on the
right or the wrong OF the controversy. III State,
suming an attitude of the sort, right. and the
Federal Government wrong, the State would succeed
from the influence oil moral causes which come in
aid OF Its authonty--and rite rerSa. Many of the
States had exercised this right OF selfprotecton, and
in various ways-even some OF these States which
denied in '9S that State could judge Of attractions
OF the Federal compact, had resorted this right
Massachusetts had been driven from her position dur
ing the war, by public opinion. She was wrong. Ma
ryland Pennsy wanna Ohio, kentucky and Georgia, be-
sides Virginia, had all exercised this light in mode
or other. Ii competent Tor the State Governments
he thought to exercise all the powers necessary for the
protection of their citizens against the oppression OF the
Federal Government, except in very extreme
themselves. BY what means they would do this, they
would determine for themselves when the exgency
The Executive, the Legislative and Judicial Departments
OF the State Governments were all many sentinels
the liberties Of the States and they possessed
of shielding the citizen from the unconstitutional acts of
the Federal Government An individual citizen, whose
rights OF person property invaded by the
authorities OF the Federal Government might raise
the question, and appeal to the Constitution for pro-
lection through the courts He might bring the cons
tuonality OF the law in issue and if the jury or the
court concurred with him, they would afford him pro-
lection against il. This interpoon might be exered
by various methods. Ii might not always succeed
but it would at least raise the question comsuonay
as TO the OF the Federal Government would be
an additional safeguard against abuse and usurpaon
Georgia il seemed had succeededhe could tell
actiy why, tor he not that she right Ohio
when her Legislature taxed the stock Sc of The United
States Bank did succeed Pennsylvania and MARYLAND
did not succeed Whether South Carolina would succeed
by the she had resored he thought least pro-
bematical at presen-bu he thought if she failed her
failure would be attributable TO her rashness and the
practicable remedy she had adopted all she adhered
the doctrine OF Virginia in 49, instead engraing new
commentary on It's text she might at least have had fair
er chance of success
All he asked was the right of the States TO Judge in
these cases Ii that granted the followed He
could not undertake to define how this right of interposi-
ton was to be exercised OH all occasions That must de-
pend on the nature of the aggression He thought how
ever that lew could well arise where usurpaons
the Federal Government could not he met by
ing the part Of the States We might coun-
terva the Tariff, he thought Ohough it the
siuous OF all encroaciments) by tax the license
retail the protected article &C. He unwilling to adj
NIT that the States must necessarily be driven
nufy protect their rights-or that thew could on pro
test and demonstrate. lie did not dread any
collisions, from the exercise OF the rights the States
they were tempered by discretion. They would always
bring the Federal Governmental in its career and
might eventually save the liberties of the country.
IL the position that the States could Judge of breaches
e iedeTa compact were denied there alternative
but to admit that the Supreme Court the arbter
This doctrine had been conended for by very few here
The gentleman from Fauquicr entertained he believed
and considered the Supreme Court the
Union.
Mr. Marshall asked the gentleman when he (Mr. NJ
had made such a declaration
Mr. Gimer said he did pretend to quote the gentle
man. but asked him IL such was not his opinion.
MIR. Campbell sad he would stand sponsor for the OPT
MON IL the gentleman was anxious to find endorser
for it,
MIR. Gilmer. ! am glad that have found a response
bic and intelligent endorscr for the doctrine.
MIR. Marshall sand the House must perceive that he
was very delcaely situated in relation to this subject
He did not by any deny that such was his opinion
but the relation in which he stood OF the mem
bers oil the Supreme Court had induced him tdiousy 10
avoid the subject IL the gentleman would recur to his
remarks on former day he would do him the justice to
admit this fact
Mr. cmer said he had not intended refer TO The gen.
tlemans remarks. He regretted having made the allu
sion to him. and had done it without rejecting upon the
delicacy OF his situation that subject Mr. c. being
about to resume
! Mr. Knox called him to order
! Mr. FaulkneT's amendment having been adj opted
J MIR. q. resumed. He would not stop now TO answer
or or explain The Inconsistencies of the Virginia Assem-
bly, He was glad, however, that this good old doctrine
OF the supremacy OF the Federal Judiciary had al length
found very responsible endorser here the gentleman
from Brooke All those who denied the right of State
toJudge OF breaches Of the compact must take refuge I'M
der tbat doctrne and he wished that others frank
as the gentleman from Brooke, avow IT, He would not
discuss this doctrine, he had attempted on former occa-
sion to shew its fallacy and dangers
lie wished 10 be understood this occasion The doc
time OF State Rights seemed have fallen suddenly into
bad repue He that its advocates in Virginia had diff
hcnes TO encounter on both hands at Presentand he
DESTROYS at least his protest against the
by which he feared all the essential rights of the States
might he sacrificed You give up all if you only dispute
about this right Of secession and revolution We would
become rebels by our own she wing Mr. Marshall asked
u the right TO secede constitutional one?l Mr. g.
san he could not well take distinction in this country
between constitutional and unconstitutional rights as all
our political institutions founded on written Consti
tntons This was more question about power than a
right The States bad expressly reserved ali these rights
which they had not delegated TO the Federal Government
ms reservation was part OF the Constitutions He repeat
edhat there was but question: and he hoped the dis
cusson would be confined to that was, whether the
States Judge AT all Of the violations its charter bv
their agent, the Federal Government This right was AZ
cient to re affirm il now.
Mr. Brown would merely remark, that although he
should vote against the propositions yet as gentlemen Ia
declared their intention Of making il test vote he pro-
tested against his vote being considered as pieein him
on The question OF secession IL was right that he shou
slate ms reasons The proposition not opportuncIy
presented there was not time weigh the question in the
scope which was given TO il in this resolution-and il he
voted against it not because he in favor of the
right OF SECESSION il had been claimed but because FIR
ther deliberalon was required important a subject
Messrs. Randolph and Sherrari also desired that no in
ference as to their views Of the question should be drawn
from their vote the proposition before the House