Columbus Democrat. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-18??, 1838-01-06

q 20 remain here long iinie.
Mr. CUFHBERF called for the reading Of
the fifth resolution granted
Alter some remarks from Mr.. AtLES, in which
be minated that ne was iniayor Of reeeiriag oil
such petitions and rejecting the prayer.
Mr.. CLAY Of Kentucky. hoped that the me-
mortal would Be Withdrawn by the Senator from
Vermont, and gave notice that he would intro
duce it at a future day when the Senate was more
r prepared 10 act.
q Mr.. PRESTON had no objection to the with
? dawa;, but wished the document might bepnn-
: ted for the use Of the Senate.
Mr.. SWIFT inquired if il case Of the with
drawal the printing would be done!
Mr.. CLAY of Alabama, contended that the
Senator had no right to withdraw; the memeri-
ais were now in possession Of the Senate.
Mr.. SWIFT expressed his Willingness to
withdraw. bat should certainly present the memo
rial again. No threats from any quarter would
prevent him from doing bis duty to his cOnstiiu-
ents.
Mr.. KING asked the Senator from Vermont
torepeat his remarks.
Mr.. SWIFT complied.
Mr.. KING demanded If the language had
personal alIuson to himself
Mr.. SWIFT had no aIluson TO any Senator
in particular but there had been threats relative
10 dissolution Of the Unon
Mr.. CALHOUN. The honorable gentleman
must then allude TO me- | have made frequent
allusion TO the dissolution of the Union. What
ever said, meant ] am able to defend my
ground but make no threats towards any Sena-
tor. My feelings on this momentous subject,
and my remarks are public, moi private in their
bearing.
Mr.. SWIFT Withdrew his memorial, and gave
notice that he would introduce i again on Tues.
day next.
The ball is thus opened in the Senate In the
House, Mr., Adams is playing TO The same tune.
We are no alarmists, but it becomes the duty Of
the South to look to this matter Originally we
were in favor Of receiving the petitions Of the
fanatics, always rejecting their prayer. believing
that this wculdbc the best means Of stayins them
IN their mad career, and that contcmptuous re-
lection would rather strengthen their cause, as il
would probably raise the cry Of persecution in
their favor. But eff mild means and gentle deeds
will not reclaim the wicked, they must be dealt
with in more severe manner, and if these de-
luded men still continue TO disturb aud embar-
rass the proceedings Of Congress with their inso-
lent and insulting memorials, We would slam
the door in their faces OF once.
'That in all cases of the abuses of the delega-
ted powers, the members of the General Govern
ment, being being chosen by the people, change
by the people would be the constitutional remedy;
but where powers are assumed which have NOT
been delegated, MULTIPLICATION Of the
act is the Iightful remedy" "That erery State
has natural right, in eases not within The com
pact, 10 NULLIFY, Of their own authority, all
assumptions by powers Of others within their lin
its; that without this they would be under the do.
minion, absolute and unlimited, Of whoever might
exercise the right of judgment for them"
Now, If the Democrat believes the above to be
both sound in tkeoa and practice, 1t is correctin
saying that il and State Rights men or NuIli6ers,
agree in principle. -.4rgus Of l2h December,
STATE RIGHTS.
We shall not be driven, at this time, BY the Ar
gus into discussion Of the subject of NulIifca-
ton. 1t is worn thread bare, and we feel sure
that our readers have long been SUBJECTED with ii;
but the above quotation from the Argus deserves
a brief notice. To the first proposition contain
cd in his quotation, ".tha in oil cases Of the abu-
ses Of the delegated powers, the members oflhe
General Government being chosen by the people,
change by the people would be the Consiitu-
tiondl remedy" we give our full and unqualified
assent. That when powers are assumed which
have not been delegated a ratification Of the act
IS the rghtful remedy we also agree is sound re-.
publican doctrine. But who is to Judge Of the
assumption Of undelegated powers, and by whom
IS this notification to be madel these are the
questions to be answered, II is upon this point
that we differ with the nullifers. They say that
4 ag..e state has the right TO decide upon the
Constituent Of any law, and nullify it,if it
chooses. We ssy SahMr. Jefferson, that aihe
rightful remedyn OF nuliissation hes with the
States mot STATE, mark u.s. and that the pro-
per constitutional mode of exercising this right Is
by the ballot box and through members duly
elected to Congress. Each State has an inqSess
toned right to express It's opinion Gas va. & Ky.
did in s9s) 10 The eonstitutonality Of any Law,
but i has no right to impose this opinion on its
sister States and make i the rule Of their action
That each and every State ..has a n0laval right |
ID cases not within the compact 10 nullify Of It's
own authority, all assumptions Of powers BY 9TH
ers, within its limits we grant you, but this Il
Revolutionary, not constitutional right. So soon
as single State exercises this right, and carries
an act Identification into effect she is ipso jdcto
out Of The union.