Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1833-01-10

hctaws oil Tue gchefa SoFtrhmett, NIUE IN NHlus
of the powers Which 1t delegates; so that South
Carolina has no supremacy the laws of the
| Union, and in this point of view cenrot annui
them. II this power existed in the States, the sa-
ses and parrots who framed the federal consiitu-
ton were employed Ia solemn deliberations 10 little
purpose. Instead Of consolidating the union as in
the preamble 10 the constitution, they proposed to
have in view, they IN dissovng the confederation,
and adopting the constitution. made bad 'care I
They have made their fabric of shfsds aud patches
totally incompetent 10 lis objects because If sin-
gle State has the power claimed b, the champions
OF notification, she may exercise II n. discretion
she may annul any law of the union-snud thcrs
is no security, that she wall exercise TIA r3w-
or discreelly than there Is that the general gov
ernment will not transcend It's poWcts--uol, III
deed, as mucl--tor single STATE would he mFe
likely TO be led ast7ay by AMBITIOUS and aspiring
men (the bane of all free governments than The en-
tire union.
The term " e. 1HiifV' is a term oi nomenlous
import and its verv sound rs calculated nmcdt
aicly 10 impress the mind strongly with the ldea OF
power,-9f er'eRsipc pure, and surely 1t could
not have entered the heads Of the trainers ef the
constitution that they were III any wise coniefr'hs
this power, winch would paraly2e the whole opc-
rations of the government, upon single State,
however small It's dimensions or sparse ITS popula-
ton Ii Is manifest to every one, that II one State
| shall snl.u any law Of the UNION, II becomes IN.
operative on the others. Twenty three States could
no, be expected 10 submit to general law, which
had ceased to be binding upon the one which had
exercised the power Of nnItylng II within It's Inn
IT'S |, would produce Tint very inequnlty which
the constitution yAs intended to provlde against.
The States opposed 10 tins doctrine would not sub
mii to bear The burdens of the government, while
| those which asserted and exercised II, were per
mlttcd equally to enjoy all the benefits OF the gov
ernment whilst, by this summary process It ex-
cmpted itsslff from fail participation OF It's bur
dcns much less could they have supposed they
Were reserving to the States power which they
did not before possess, there being no state OF
things upon which snch power could have acted
when the constitution was framed. Take up The
constitution and examine every power winch ~
conferred upon the general government, and then
enquire, what power is conferred by that iustra
ment the exercise Of which isl not nj the mercy OF
any single State, if this power belongs to t"cn'
Every reader will readily pceco,ve, there Is not
one. Does it not then, occur to the mind, for what
purpose the confederation dissolved, and the
| constitution established, aud why the consi,,u-
tlona powers We're separated from the State an-
thorites 10 act directly upon ic peoplc through
| the federal instead of the State authorizes why
1t was tina, the people Of each State were not acted
| upon through its State government why II was
| that system coneirng powers legm as well as
| moral, was adopted III lieu OF one which had been
shown TO be altogether powcfless 7 Letthe histo
| ry Of that day answer, and 1t will Inc found thh'
reason and history concur IN negahNng the idea
| OF such a reserved paccy 1t would have been I'M
wise u have conferred or reserved this power II
the States Individually, because its exercise wood
be controlled by local interests by predomInatng
| faction, and by many other causes equally oblef-
,ionabe and when once exercised, If Improperly
or injudlciously done, there is no rcmedy-there is
10 appea--the decsio,. is faal---the cdec, lrre-
medi,blc. The facility aud ndlscreion with which
! II single State might exercise tins power, and the
effect which it would havcupon the general interest
of the union, IN a state Of war III regulating com.
mercc, IN collecting necessary revenue ~ paylns
off national debts and indeed IN the exercise Of ev
cry other granted power conclnsiscly proves that
| such an extraordinary remedy--one which might
| be exercised with such tremendous eiicct-oushi
not to have been conferred upon or rcserrel lotbe
individual Stateshnd the fair Inference Is, THAI II
was not conferred or reserved
! 1t has been snid, that If this power of nnllifca
ton exists in the several States, II IS attribute Of
sovereignty which places the laws of the union al
the mercy of each State. II Statc possesses this
power at all, she possesses II uncontrollaby, from
| her decision there is no appeal. There is no
earthly power which can control the lndscreel and
ilnproper exercise oft If the constitution con
fers this right or if it reserved to the States
there has been established o tribunal 10 corrc,, \
ny error which might be committed. 1t is an ari
Of sorrrs,gn power, which acknowledges no supe
S,a III &c thn nie ultyc md ia
Judgment is reversible In the exercise OF tins
power. which man be done under the influence of
bad motives the State authorities, N the hands Of
doninan, faction led on by ambitious and de
signing leaders may dnnuk and NUKE eo,d ANY
law Possessing the power of Uncontrolled judg-
melt, she has the arbitrary, though not the moral
right TO do his-Bu', say thc advocates OF this
power it is only claimed affecting the exercise
of p01cerS such Ms are clearly and
paipably unconstitutional This, we admit, IS the
Mco,u bnt who can set bounds to It's pratt,cai OPP
crations7 They claim, not of0y the poref, but the
| crciusre rigb Of Judging 7chen mas pomfr staH
be etcreiscd They not only assfr, right 10 nul-
lily mn unconstuon Il law, but they also claim the
privilege of dociI;ns gAat laws are representations
al 1.-THE State is to be the EXCESSIVE JnuSe IN
such matters, is i, not c',uf as the sun ~ noon
day that If she is, from poic opposed 70 any
law she cnnro be an impartial, mn less s 'd'ai-
libe iudsa Is II not coriain that she wii be IN
huenced, in her decision. more - passion
than by Judgments And IS there not moro dan-
ger that she will nulIny constitutional laws than
that the general government viii persist N The ex-
srcse Of usurped powers ? Possessing the no~cr
to declare any law vL,cn oper ties ,'tIe severely
upon her interests, to be unc institutional, ana TO
nuIlify it, there can be very little reason to doubt
that infamed by the eloquent harangues OF ambi-
| ,ious demagognes the power would DC sometimes
exercised IN relation to laws clearly constitutional
| and the very fact that this power might be a
bused and pros,;u,cd to the bases, purposes OF am
hilton or interest is conclusive argument against