Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1833-03-12

~
By force! Does any man, IN his senses. believe
that this beautiful structure-this harmonious
aggregate of States, produced bv the joint con-
sent Of ali, can be- preserved BY force. LIS very
Introduction will b. certain destruction OF TINS
Federal Union. M. no. You cannot Keep
the State. united in their constitutional and te-
deral bond, BY furce Force may. indeed. hold
the parts together; but Such union w0nid be
the bond between master and slave; un'on
Of exactun IN one side. and of unqualified zoe.
dipnce ON the other, That obedience which we
are tod Dy the Senator from P.nusy wanna, Mr..
Wilkins. is the Uniun. Yes, exacton on the
side of the master-for this very bill is intended
to collect what can be 10 longer called taxes
the voluntary contribution of a free people; but
tribute, tribute to he collected under the mouths
of the cannon. Your custom muse is already
transferred to garrison, and that garrison. WIN
its batteries turned, not against the enemy 81
your country, bur on subjects, q Will not s'v
citizens, ON whom you propose to levy cnnir'nu-
tons Has reason fed from our borders! Have
we ceased to reflect? Ii is madness TO suppose
that the Union can be preserved Nv force l
tell YOU plainly, that the b'l should it pass, can
not be enforced. 1t will prove only blot upon
your statute book. reproach To the year, and a
disgrace to the American Senate. repeat. that
It will not be executed; it will rouse the DOR
mant spirit of the people, and open their eyes to
the approach of despotism. The country has
sunk into avarice and political corruption. from
which no,aing rnsah Ss%Nse it, hut some mea.
sure, on the part Of the Government, OF folly and
madness. such as that now under consideration.
Disguise it as you may, the controversy Is one
between power and liberty, and he would tell
the gentlemen who are opposed to him, that az
strong as nigh, be- the love of power on their
side, the love of libertyis sill stronger on ours.
H story furnishes many instances Ut similar s'rus.
ces, where the love of liberty has prevailed
against power under every disadvantage, and
among them few more striking than that of our
own revolution; where, as strong as was the
parent country, and as feeble as were the colon
les, yet under the impulse OF liberty and the
blessing of God. they gloriously triumphed IN
the contest. There were. indeed, many and
striking raosles between that aud the present
controversy: they both originated Substantially
in the .ane cause, with this difference. that IN
the present case. the power uf taxation Is con
verted into that Of regulating industry In that
the po" err of regulating industry. by the regnla-
inn of commerce, was attempted 10 be eonse
mi % abe power of taxation Were he t" trace
he analogy further, We would find that the
perver>ion of the taxing pnwer. in one case, has
given precisely the same control 10 the Northern
section over the industry of the southern section
If the Union. which the power TO regulate COM
m.rcp gave to & Britain over the industry OF the
,lnnies: and that the very articles IN which the
co mics we're permitted to have free trade, and
,,o.e in WIN, the mniher country had mOnopO-
", are almost eni, ally tie same as those under
viii, h Ihr Southern States ave permitted to have
i, fee trad, h, the act of 1882, and which the
No rhrru States have by the sane act. secured az
, monopoly, The o difference, Is in tn mean
in the { ,r nar. he cuinnirs we're permitted %
save free trade with all countries Suuth Oi Cape
Finisiprre. 4 cape in the northern part ct Span;
.hie north OF that the trade OF the colonies was
lroh rbited. except rhrough the mother country,
| ~ means Of her commercial regulations. IL we
compare the products uf the country north and
South IT the cape FIuisrerre, We will hnd them
almost lndentical with the last Ut the protected
aud unprotected articles contained III act last
wear. Nor does the analogy terminate here
The ,erv Arguments res0r'ed to al the com
mencement of the American revolution, and the
MEASURE. adopted. and the motives assigned to
bring on that contest, Ito entoree the Iaw,) are
almost indentcal'y the same.
But. (said Mr. CaIhoun.) to return from this
dlgresStOn To the consideration OI the pIli NHdt-
ever opinion may exist UPON other points. there
Is one IN which he would suppose there could b.
none: that this bill rests on principles which, VI
carried out, will ride over State sovrreigntes,
and that it viii be idle for any OF us advocates
hereafter to talk OF State rights. The Senator
from Virginia iMr. R,ves) says that he IL the ad'
vocate Of State rights; but he must permit me to
tell him that. although he NAV differ III premises
from the other gentlemen with whom he acts on
this occasion, yet in supporting this bl he obi.
terates every sestigc Of distinction between him
and them; saving only that. protesting the prIn-
cipIes of 9s. his example will be more pernic'ou'
than that of the most open and bitter opponents
of the rights of the States. He would also add.
what he was compelled TO say. that he must con
suler him Mr. Rives) as less consistent than our
old opponents. whose conclusions we're fairly
dra wn from their premises. whilst his premises
ought to have led him to opposite conclusions. -
The gentleman has told US that the new tangled
doctrines, as he chose to call them. had brought
State rights into disrepute. He must tell him. in
repIy, that what he called new tangled, are but