Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1835-01-01

he war Ct communities against communities carried
b. making unjust and unconstitutional laws instead
{" ',iNng hazardous ami bloody battles La this lcgs-
hlvc wararc, have the truth of eli that have
sud, as 10 the injustice Of communities acting rs such
most Sirisngly illustrated. have mon fhigh o-
nonr aud unbcmised Integrity in all the relations Of pri
vatc life, who would slrnk with abhorrcnce from the
perpctra;ion of act of individual injustice voting,
with an undisurbcd conscience fer measures of lc0sa-
tive plundcr and thongh fully convinced of their une-
quail and oppressive operation would have been lust as
yam to think OF restraining them by Showing their in
justice, 10 Il would have been the march Of
Roman army, by demonstrating the injustice of the war
The rights and liberties oil the minority States, 50 to
speak, ar IN much greater jeopardy from the injustice
oil The majority States acting through the Federal Co
yehnen under an assumed and practical omn pntence
than they possibly could be- if there existed compact
Oh union, anu each were separate and Independent. /
do consccntousy believe that the smallest State the
continent of Europe amidst the gigantic struggles of
warning monarch.cs. holds its RIGHTS and liberties bv
much guarantees under the law of nations than
South Carolina holds her rights and liberties under
the Federal Constitution. subject to construction which
asoiuiey lnvcrt It's operation, rendering il chain TO
the oppressed and cobwcb TO the opprcssor 1t is not
to be doubled for example that il league of the mSht
est potentatcs OF Europe. and exercise
the power OF prohibiting the trade of the insign-
cant kingdom with the other nations of the earth or of
imposing restrictive duties upon that trade with the
avowcd purpose of promoting the interest of the cone-
dcratcd powers, the whole commercial and civilized
world would he aniiaatcd by common sentiment of
Indignation nj tine outrage, not less vehement than that
which was excited half century by the ina-
nou" PARTITION OF Poland And yet and cxtraor-
binary as may appear this is precisely the outrage,
vaicn which New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts
and the associates have committed against the planting
States OF tins Union through the perverted agency offs
government created 20 prevent such ourages and which
that government had deliberately prepared enforce
against the sovereign State of South Carolina, by the
oayonct OF meFccnary soers, under all the pretended
sanctions OF human authority.
The Federal Government has already passed through
the first stage of its progress to military despots Con-
gross has assumed, and practically maintained the raht
of deciding in the last resort the extent of it's own pow
erswhich is but another form of affirming that the
of Congress paramount 10 the Constitution And in
the natural OF things, the Chief Magistrate of
the confederacy, following the example of the Legisa
tive Department has assumed and practically maintained
the right OF deciding in the last resort the
only OF his osn powers but of the powers of all the
other departments; thus making his arbitrary will
paramount to the acts of Congress- the Of
the Courts, and the Constitution itself
Such gentlemen, is the true practical character of
Government, the Magistrate ofwhch, has solcmnly
and officially denied that the States sovereign and
attempted TO dissipaie their sovereignty he would
dispense unlawful assembly by the potent energy of
Proclamation. Under these circumstances you would
nave betrayed the great of sovereignty i'm
which s. Carolina has nobly struggled if you had fall
tered or hcsitaed in moving forward in the course so
clearly and deliberately indicated by the people in their
sovereign capacity. therefore congratulate Won most
sincerely, the final ratification of the amendment of
the Constitution; and the dcvoutly rejoiced
at this happy consumnaton, have the gratifying
assurance that the portion OF our feowcitizens who
have been most srcnuousy opposed the oath Of ale
glance heretofore required by of the Legislature
will peoccobly submit TO it, that it is required of
them by the sovereign power of the people themselves
indeed 1t is difficult TO perceive any possible ground
upon which even the mots conscientious believer in the
constitutional supremacy of the Federal Government
could scrupe to pledge his allegiance TO the State
by oath which the Constitution reuuiros u,la.s no
altogether denies the State the attribute of SOVEREIGN
ty, and regards it corporaton standing upon
iooting OF equality with the municipalities of Charles
ton and Columbia never have doubted that the power
to exact from every officer of the State oath of ALE
glance and fidelity of the clcarest of all the ord
nary powers of the Legislature. Between the oath to
protect and defend the Constitution of this State and
of the United States and the oath to shear true allie
glance to the State of South Carolina there is not the
slightest ncompabiii.y. They stand together in per
feet harmony The so far from orbdding the other
by natural repugnance rather invite il by ma
tura Conference as parts OF one consistent whole But
no one can doubt the power of the Legislature exact
an oath OF allegiance from citizens generally who are
not officers. AS the Constitution does require ann
oath to be administered TO them implication can he
raised against the power of the Legislature an
oath of allegiance from them The principle there
fore upon which the oath of allegiance has been held to
be inconsistent with the State Constitution. involves
the strange constitutional anomaly that the Legislature
may exact oath of allegiance from every citizen
fore he becomes officer, but not afterwards So that
the invesre of an Office, far from imposing an OBJ
legation to be faithful to the State would operate as an
exemption from it. But since the amendment of the
Constitution of the State, the only ground upon which
any citizen hesitate TO take the oath it now Cnioins
is the supposed ncompatiby of that oath with his
obligations to the Constitution of the United States
Now the requirements of tic oath briefly to 'bc
faithful and bear true allegiance the State of South
Carolina and to suPport the Constitution of this State
and OF the OnAcd Suites. There is no known rule of
which can be made to rive the slightest
color of pausiblity to the inference, that pledge of
allegiance, In the very terms prescribed by the Consti-
tutons Of several Of the States from the CONNIE
of the Federal Government imports obligation ncon
sstent with the Constitution of the United States when
the very oath which contains this pledge of acgiancc
contains also, express pledge support that Consttu
ton Contrary 20 every established canon Of intcrprc-
taon, this would be creating discrepancy between the
several pledges of the oath by strained implica
ton, which would anIu by inference the clear aud cx-
promise to support The Constitution of the United
States.
am aware, that very great diversity ofopinionpre-
walls not only rs to the definition of The Allegiance
but rs 10 the extent aud character of that peculiar A
glance which the citizens owe TO the respective States
III the Confederdcy. understand Allegiance 10 mean
the tie which binds citizen be faithful to c sovc-
reign power wherever that power may reside and un.
dcrsand sovereignty TO mean that ultimate power in tic
state which no other power rghtiuly control with
IN its territorial limits. Thus understood cannot doubt
that Allegiance, wherever due, is essentially paramount
and exclusive conclusion which unavoidably results
from the very definition OF the terms Allegiance and So
veregnty. The idea of divided Allegiance is sole
eism in language not less than it horesy in politics
We have more than human authority for saying that "no
man can serve two masters. and the condition of our
citizens would be dcporabic indeed if they were liable
to sucha scrvituie have little doubt that, under
the Federal system, the ultimate uncomfortable now
or to which have referred, resides in the respective
States, original and inherent attribute In other
words, believe the States have surrendered their
Sovereignty and have doubt that the people of South
Carolina hold the opinions all these points But
IL surely not the intention of the people to Law
for the conscience Of the citizen by requiring him
TO swear TO matter Of opinion. The State has an un.
doubted right 70 control The action Of its citizens but il
would he most odi0us exercise Of power attempt
regulate men opinion by law and still by an oath
OF ofhcc When took oath, as a Member of Con
gress, to support the Constitution of the United Staes
certainly incurred obligation to support that instru-
ment IN any other sense than that in which understood