Liberty advocate. [volume] (Liberty, Miss.) 1835-1866, 1837-03-21

operation within the limits Of State
+, from the same source from which the act.
e. Of the State governments derive their bin
9 ding force, viz: the people Of State. Il
I is by the consent of the.people of each in
70 dividua State, that the Constitution of the
j. United States, the laws and treaties made
y in pursuance thereof, are operative within
l. its limits. So it is by the consent of each
that the acts Of the State government are
. binding. They must both look for the op
y Grafton of their acts within the limits of
1t State, to the same source--the people
r Of State.
c If we l6k still further into this subject,
o we will Discover another important tea-
: ture thatlays claim to our admiration. 1t
is this, that the people of each State stands
armed with veto power, to check all en-
croachments Of either Federal or Stan
, governments or of the different depart
! ments of either government upon each 9TH
, or, within their respective tel ritorial linn
its. According to the distribution of pow
ers between the Federal and State govern
ments, we will quickly learn that the Fed
eral government can only exercise those
powers specifically granted to it. Mel
Their can the State government resume
the exercise Of undelegated power, nor
powers prohibited 10 1t either by the State
or Federal Constitutions, Should the Fed !
era government assume the exercise of
undeIegated power, and thus wantonly
J Ipn,, Ii. L.
fathers. the people Of each State, they a.
lone being parties to the constitutional
compact, have the right to asse .nbIe in con-
venton, declare the act unconstitutional,
and arrest the operation within It's terrific
rial limits, until convention OF The States
be called to assign the disputed power to
the Federal government, if it should de-
eide in tavorof the States. On the other
hand, should State government resume )
the exerciseof delegated power, or powers {
prohibited 10 it, the people of that State
have the same right, as in the above case,
to assemble ~ convention, and declare such
an act unconstitutional, and arrest its or
their operations but should the people in {
convention sanction the unconstitutional
act and thus become accessory toa viola |
lailon of the Constitution, the Federal
government has within its reach the same '
remedy, as inthe above case, the call of |
convention Of the States to adjust the dis
pute amicabE, in accordance with the pro- l
visions of the 9th Article of the Constitu- {
ton. I
To the extent of the delegated powers,
the Federal government is supreme, but
beyond The Constitution, the federal gov !
ern ent has no more power to bind me !
by its acts, than the British Parliament .
To the extent of the delegated powers, +
they are united, because they have agreed .
to exercise co'JOimiiy these powers, in pro- !
vldlng for those general concerns in which !
they all felta mutual interest: but to the 6
extent of the reserved powers they are :
as much ont Of the union as if no such I'M !;
ion existed, because they agreed to OBJ q
serve all powers not delegated nor prohib- c
tied, to themselves eSpectiUeIy, to he exerci- q
Sed In providing for the peculiar and do n
nestle concerns of each State, in which y
there was no common and mutual interest. ;,
So much for the supposed anomaly of be- n
ing IN the Union ana ont of the Union at b.
the same time.--This right of a State TO G
nterpose and arrest the unconstitutional :,
action of the Federal government, does :,
not at all conflict with the right of ma ~
orlty to rule. A ma ority have no more n
Of a natural right to rule in the United -,
States, than they have in England, France =,
or Russia. The right of majority to "
rule is not natural, Inherent, imdestructa- .,
be lght Pre-existing the formation of the th
Constitution and governments; but il is ~ !"
conventional or derivative right, emana-
ing from the Constitutions under which %
we live, subject to the limitations and re- ~
imposed by the Constitutions o on
In the cases submitted to them a majority ~
has the unquestionabIe right to rule. hit nj
hey have no right TO rule in the cases -
not submitted TO them. They have no ~
more right step beyond The Constitution 81
and leglslate me into slavery, than the c.
Alng OF England or the Autocrat of Rus =
ma. SO far as the Constitution authorizes
'maIorlty TO go, we readily c6ncede their ",
lcts are binding; but we do say, that when III
majority lnvades the Constitution ofour nv
and, and breaks down the barriers thrown n
lround It by that sacred instrument. then no
md IN such case only, their acts and doings do
IRE IN contrayention of the Constitution. of
lot made in pursuance thereof, and there ab
ore unconstitutional, and as such, are no ro
avs at AL are of no binding force, to V
'h'ch netther State nor imdirid9al is bound
submit. In fact, the doctrine that a ma
orlty shall rule IN all cases, is i'll suited to All
he meridian under which we live, and sa- sal
ours too much Of British Parliamentary Sc,
impotence. i would throw our govern fro
nent. INTO that class of despotic govern AM
lents which have described as limited ne,