Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1833-03-15

veral States. as separate and sovereign cOminu-
mites, are the parties.
Q. That these sovereign parties have right to
Judge, each for itself, of any alleged violation
Of the constitution by Congress; and. in case OF
such violation, to chuose, each for ITSELF its own
mode and measure Of redress.
II is true sir. that the honorable member calls
this 90 CONSTITUTIONAL compact; but still he at
firms It to be compac, 6eiDten sovereign Sfafes
What precise meaning. then, does he attach to
the term constitutional? When applied to CON-
pacts between sovereign States, the term const'-
tutional affixes to that word compact no definite
idea. Were we to hear OF d constitutional league
or treaty between England and France. or con-
stitutionaI convention between Austria and tus-
STA, we should not understand what could be IN
tended By such leage, such treaty, or such a
convention. In these connexions, the WORD Is
void Of all meaning; and yet. sir, it is easy,
quite easv, to see why the honorable gentleman
bias used il in these resolutions. lie cannot open
the book, and look upon our written frame o.
Government, without seeing that It Is called
constitution This may well be appalling t" him.
II threatens his whole doctrine OF compact, and
its darling derivatives, notification and seces-
sion, with instant c0nutatiOn. Because, IT he
admits our.Instrument of government to be con.
sfiiuiiOn. then, for that very reason. 1t Is not
compact between sovereigns; constitution OF
Government, and compact between sovereign
Powers. beng things essentially unlike III their
very natures, and incapable of ever being the
same. Yet the word constitution is on the very
front Of that instrument. He cannot overlook
it. He seeks, therefore, to compromise the mat.
ter. and to sink all the substantial sense OF the
| word. while he retains resemblance Of It's sound.
| He introduces new word OF his own, viz COM
pact, as importing the principal idea, and design
ed to play the principal part, and degrades con
stitu!ion into an insignificant, idle epithet, at
tached to compact The whole, then, stands as
constitutional compact" And IN this way
he hopes to pass off plausible gloss, as satisfying
the words Of the instrument; but he will find
himself disappointed. Sir. must say to the no.
norable gentleman, that, in our American polItl-
cal grammar, CONSTITUTION is a noun substan-
| tive; il imports distinct aud clear idea, vi It.
self; and it is not to lose its Importance and dig
nifty, il is not 10 be turned into a poor, ambigu-
Gus, senseless. unmeaning adjective, for the pur-
pose Of accommodating any new set OF political
notions. Sir. we reject his new rules of syntax
altogether. We will not give up our forms OF
political speech to the grammarlans OF the school
of MULTI alton. Bv the constitution. We mean
not a :" constitutional compact" but, simply and
directly. the constitution, the fundamental law;
and If theIe be one word IN the language, which
the penpir OF the United States understand. this
is that word We know no more OF a consttu
iionai COMPACT between sovereign Powers than
we know OF constitutional identure Of co-part
nsrship. consfiWional deed of conveyance, or
a constitutional bill Of exchange. But we know
what the constitution is; we know what the
bond of our Union and the security of our H.
l L "A Il Il ,fop
it, in its PLAIN sense and unsophis'ocated mean
ing
The sense of the sen,eman's proposition,
other, by the use Of thi, word. That PROPOSE
ton still ,s. that our system of Government is
but compact between the people Of separate and
sovereign States
| Wasit Mhrabeau, Mr.. President, or what 9th.
er master of the human passions, who has told
US that words are things? They are indeed
things. aud things Of mighty influence. not only
in addresses to the passions and high-wrought
feelings of mankind, but in the discussion Of le-
gal and political questions also: because just
conc is often avoided, or false one reach.
ed, by the adrot substitution of one phrase, or
one word. tor another. OF this we have, |
think, another example in the resolutions before
US.
The first resolution declares that the people
Of the several States ''acceied' tn the conshtu-
ton, or to the Constitutional compact, as II is
| called. This word 'accede" not found either
in the constitution Itself, or in the ratification of
it by any one of the States, has been chosen for
use here, doubtless not without well consider
ed purpose.
The natural converse of accession is secession;
and, therefore, when il is stated that the people
OF the States acceded to the Union. it may be
more plausibly argued that they may seee,ie from
1t. 1t, in adopting the constitution, nothing was
done but accedlng to compact, nothing would
seem necessary. in order to break it up, but to
secede from the same compact. But the term IS
wholly out Of place. accession, as word ap
piled to political associations. implies coming
into league, treaty. or cofed-racy. Oy one
hitherto . stranger to it; and secession imp les
departing from such league or confederaey. The
people Of the United States have Issued no such
form Of expression, in establishing the present
Government, They do not saw that they accede
IN Ieague but they declare that thew Orftdin and