Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1836-03-05
VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE.
DEFERRED DEBaTE.-fCosTIsuEp1
iioooE or DELEGAIES-S Saturday, Jan. l6.

from the city OF Richmond (Nr. Stanardl oSened his
argument on yesterday by adverting the great una.
nmty which prevailed in the Southern States on this
subJect-expressed desire that similar unanimy MIGHT
prevail here-and alluded of reproach 10 those
VINO cannot be persuaded GO along with hin, in the
aaopton OF The resolutions presented by the committee
ror myself Mr. Speaker, would gladly receive Tie re-
solutions of either of the Southern States as an aterna
1--WE lar preferable TO those which you hold in your
mana. have not examined them with great attention;
out so Tar as slight and as,y perusa NAV allow me 10
Judge, not even South Carolina herse-ever disposed 10
uta nieasures-has advanced an opinion, assumed
posiuon, which is not true aud reasonable But some
oil The doctrines contained the resolutions now M,
tempted to be forced on the consideration of this House
we do regard untrue, dangerous and fatal i'm ,be;r
Consequences AND because, sir cannot heartily
embrace the opinions of gentlenen-cannot force an
unconvnced mind 10 the reception of their prncples-
we are unsparingy denounced captious i'm our obiec
us, ana as iacious In our opposition. You are told
SIR that these resolutions have bv com
ee, selected Tor the purpose OF taking this delicate
SUBJECT under consideratonthat they are the result of
great deiberaon-and ought, therefore, to be unnni.
mousy adopted. ~
What is the history of the proceedings in thai conn
l'ee: lhese resolutions introduced bv the gen-
teian from the City of Richmond-read by him i'm his
place. and several adopted before single member had
m opportunity 10 examine, aud TO ascertain by careful
consideration The character aud tendency the doctrines
contained in them. Here sa,ion took nloce
between Mr. Garland, Mr. Wilson of Bo,etourt and
MI Sanard, as TO the number of resolutions ndonted
hlr Wilson concurred with Mr. G. that s,ve,uI hod
been adopted but did recoect the precise number.
ne oeeved, however, that two voted on before he
lr. nnrd
Mr. Garland continued Ii seems then MIR Sneoker
an not mistaken as to the fact that some these resoIu
lions were voted on in committee before members hnd an
opportunity 10 give them quiet and deliberate
ton; two at least according To the recollection of IN. e
teman from BOtetourt, were thus hastily adopied
e' Tue resolution now under discussion containing the
oUhoAous principles against which are contcnding
1 lie whole series of resolutions those only excened
when contain abstract and irrelevant propositions was
objectionable to many members of the COMMITTEES.
substitute was Offered for nearly each one of them and
mad the vote been finally taken the whole they would
nave Deen carried by majority of two onIv and
yer gentlemen seem to expect unanimity here-are
disposed to those who do moi responJ In ,hor
oPinons-are surprised that the voice of oppositon
snouid De raised, and ready the responsibility
VI .ns senate ON those who would have most gladly
avoided all discussion. Whatever NAV be the conse
quehces to myself shall not hesitate speak the truth
wheh believe the peace and welfare of my country arr.
endangered ny principles maintained this floor do
regard the proposition contained in the second resolu
uon-the principle which be the necessary conse
quehce Vi us present phraseologyas and dan
geIouS. When undertook few days since to ANAL we
the resolution and to point Objectionable features
many gentlemen seemed To have been taken entirely bv
SURPRISE and could not persuade themselves that had
gwen correct view OF the subject The consequence was
That whena vote taken tcenty mbers only
me IN noton to strike from the resolution the obecon
able clause Since then have one single nile
man. VINO, In conversation, does fully concur with me
Ia onion and who satisfied on an ex nation
at te resolution as stands 10 extremely Objectionable
that IL goes lar beyond the
contains ultra principles for which South Caro-
una docs not contend. ] glad to find on Yesterday
'hS Sehtieinaii rom campbell he
views with myself and was not little gIotifed cir
Ut The iorcbie manner in which he discussed the ones
tioil 30 forcibie the argument that the ye LEHMAN
lroui hcinond City, who stands as the special
oil TINS resolution was driven entirely from his original
ground OF defence. So clearly was ii shown thai the
citzen Cannot violate the Constitution in the same vav
that the General Government a State can that the
gentleman from Richmond was forced TO take odvnn,a0
OF Tie accidental phraseology OF the latter clause off The
resolution, and plead that the citizen though he NAV
not violate The Constitution, may yet violate the
toHS OF the Constitution. Gentlemen Ia
dtedun aud t,cecdedee; if this not tweedno then
nave no idea OF the meaning of words. But lei us ad
'unce 10 the argument and examine the strength of the
position now assumed by the gentleman from Richmond
nc latter part OF the resolution under discussion con-
toiis the following clause All interference Herewith
domestic slavery by the general government, the other
states, or the cliizes OF other States invasive of The
rights OF the States and violates the obligations nj The
CONSTITUTION Here are, IN grammatical parlance three
ushct SUBJECTS, the General Government the States
and the citizens OF States each having the same a,,,i
Oute ana the same object. The General Gove,nmeo,
py an interference invades the rights of the States and
violates the obligations ct the Consttuonthe States
ny the same invade the rights of the States md voln
the Obligations OF the Constilution-he citizens bv an
interference, violate the obligations OF Tire
ana invade the rights of the States Now il is the main
est principle ut language that the same de in vch
the common object affected by one subject il il AFFECT
ed by The other; and you had Just as well attennt IN
oyenurn The simplest principles of mathematics as to
disregard this fundamental law of language So long
therefore, as the resolution retains its present form II as
serts thus proposition, that the citizen can invade III.
rights OF the States and violate the obligations of line Con
sl'lution, in the same manner in when the General On
yernmcnt or the states violate these sacred
Let us see whether this proposition be true Tbese
states were originally sovereign md but for
this common defence and general welfare they
into solemn compact, ana formed Federal Govern
ment, which should be supreme over them all Bnt tho
constitution OF Government then ormeo is one of ;ted
aud specified powerful other powers necessary to the
complete organization of Government are reserved To
the States themselves aud constitute " hat are
ly called estate Rights" Now ask whether n Inc ros
sbe for any other than the parties to this conpnct 10
violate It's obligations IL the General (;ovefnmen N,
uanscends the limit prescribed by the Constitution II
not only violates the obligations of that Constitution but
must inevitably invade some right which has been re.
served to the States. So on the other hand II Stat
should assume powers specially delegated by the Con-
sutution To the Federal Governnent these rights and
obligations would be affected by such action Supuose
Tor example, State should undertake TO lsy an Utmost
duty on the domestic trade of other Stales--such
an act would violate an express provision Of the
Constitution, and invade the rights of the State
whose was thus embarrassed Can In.
rights and obligations here spoken Of be 10 any man.
ncr affected by the citzen Can he reach them p
Are they not the fundamental principles the organic
laws by which States aud Governments alone are con-
uohcd and these be dsregarded violated there is
no other arbte TO decide the controversy save the par
ties themselves. But the citizen is anenable 10 the
laws, and is punishable in the courts of Justice The
laws enacted by the General Government vpernte di.
feciy On individuals without regard to State divisions
Should these laws be unconstitutional there are tribu.
nails to determine; but long they are in operation
they act directly on the citizen, and do not recognize
my other law paramount TO itself Now sir can the
citizen commit any in which he will not be met Inv
some Law either State or Federai Can he perform apv
act which shall be violation Of the obligations Of tie
Constitution rather than the sanctions Of some positive
law All public officers take an oath TO protect the
Constitution of the United Staes-Suppose he fails TO
perform the duties of his Office what IL ie coosconeros