Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-03-26

dieais legislative declarations Of opinion, against the ob.
jec,ions urged by these States. Far too numerous for quo.
taton here are the passages in this report, which speak oil
"Me declarations Of opinion by the General assembly,
" the declardtory recurrence to fundamental principles
aud of"m General assembly hdring DECLARED THEIR
OPINIONS MERELY, &c. &c. hut IL may suffice TO give
from the commentary on the last two resolutions, the toll
lowing striking extract, TO which | solicit the attention Of
every candid enquirer for truth
1T has been said, that it belongs to the Judiciary OF
the United States, aud not the State Legislatures, 10 de-
clare the meaning OF the Federal Constitution"
" but a deciardtion, that proceedings of the Federal
government are not warranted by the Constitution, is
novelty neither among the citizens, nor among the Legis-
is'ures OF the States; nor are the citizens or the Legisla-
lure OF virginia singular in the example oil IT,"
Nor can the declarations of either, whether affirming
or denying the consttutionality OF measures OF the Fede
raj Government, or whether made before, or after judicial
decisions thereon, be deemed in any point Of view an as
sumption Of the Office Of the judge. THE DECLARATIONS
IN SUCH CASES ARE EXPRESSIONS OF OPINION, UN-
ACCOMPANIED WITH ANY OTHER EFFECT THAN
WHAT THEY MAY PRODUCE ON OPINION BY ExcIr-
INC REFLEcTIoN. The former may lead to a change in
the Legislative expression of the general will possibly to
q change IN the opinion oil the Judiciary the latter en-
forces the general will, whilst that will and that opinion
continue unchanged"
Sand II there be no improperly in declaring the t,.
consrfutl0ndtfy Of proceedings IN the Federal Govern
xenf, where can be- the improperly of communicating the
declaration TO other States, and inviting their concurrence
la q like declaration ? What is allowable for one must
be allowable for all. and a free communication among the
States, where the Constitution imposes no restraint, is as
allowable among the State Governments as among other
public bodies or private citizens. This consideration de
rives a weight, which cannot be denied TO it, from the re-
tation OF the State Legislature 10 the Federal Legislature
a. the immediate constituents OF one OF its branches"
The whole scope aud tenor of the argument contained
In these passages permit no pretence for a doubt, that our
own Legislature at that day regarded the objections of the
other States, in precisely the same light that Mr.. Rives
now views them, viz: as mainly directed against 90 the
right Of a State Legislature TO declare an act If Con-
gress unconstitutional, and toJ0und thereon appeals TO
the other States"
In still further confederation of this position, we have the
emphatic evidence, at 4 later period, OF the author of this
report, VINO, IN the closing paragraph OF his letter to the
Editor ofthe North American Review, says; g If any fur
ther lights ON the subject could be needed, a very strong
one Is reflected in the answers to the resolutions by the
states which protested against them. The main 0bjec-
non Of these, beyond a few general complaints of the in
~nammatory tendency of The resolutions, was directed
against the assumed authority IF a State Legislature to
DECLARE a fdo Of the United States unconstitutional
which they pronounced an unwarrantable Interference,
with the exclusive Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of
tho United States" am aware, that some OF the AFRO
giant aud Cabling popinjays of the present day are seek
Ing, with upstart presumption, TO detract from the authori-
~ justly due to the opinions OF this chief architect of our
republican systems; but with an intelligent public. the
blows which they ain at his admantine reputation.
will recoil upon themselves. In the repose OF his declining
years, his fame becomes the heritage OF his grateful coun-
trymen, and they will not fail 10 mark with their indignant
scorn, the contemptuous lightness with which these ephe-
neral politicians affect to treat the authority of this vene-
rable statesman.
After a candid and mature examination OF the evidences
the reader to his surprise, at the miserable abortioa of this
first effort TO find fault specifically with Mr.. Rives's expo.
sition Of the true doctrine OF State Rights.