The Whig standard. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1843-1844, 1843-12-25

has not told US ana dlu not noid IL very ma |
terial but in both cases, the issue made was
substantially and in principle the same.
There has been another effort to carry out the |
law-not by South Carolina judge, but by ne.
gotiation with foreign power, to effect the
same species OF oppression in relation to coored
mariners, such as the cooks and stewards of
merchant vessels. And here let me say that the
enormous and terrifying danger-a danger so
terrible to the military and chiyalrous gentle
mania laugh that rather than risk it the
Union itself is to be dissolved, is this, that South
Carolina will not be able to sustain her power
over her slaves because free colored cook or
steward should remain on board vessel at
Charleston for few days! 1t cannot he en-
dured. 1t is too terrible; you must nab the poor
mortal, citizen most likely of my own State, or
of Rhode Island, or the subject of some foreign
power, TO whom we are bound by treaty that her
subjects shall be treated by US with kindness
and hospitality. In the case of this to which
allude, the Government Of the United States and
the Government Of South Carolina had both to
deal with great foreign power on that question.
another case at Charleston, when complaint
was made by the British Consul, and something
very like threat was uttered, that if the men
seized were not released it might lead to quar-
rel between the United States and Great Bril-
tain /; and in the end it came to this that ano-
Their highly distinguished Attorney General of
the United States from South Carolina, a gentle
man for whose memory | cherish, as we all
must, the most sincere respect, wrote to the
British Consul that he had done all he could to
get the law repealed, even going SO far as to
state that the consequence of enforcing its pro-
visions might be nothing short of war with
Great Britain, but he was sorry to say that his
efforts had been all in vain; but that, even should
war ensue, the State was resolved TO adhere to
the ground she had taken. Here is an effectual
confirmation of what the gentleman near me
has given as his own opinion: in fact, the State
has declared, through these two distinguished
gentlemen, my friend here (Mr. Holmes) and the
late Attorney General, (Mr. Legare,) that even
though dissolution of the Union and war
with England must be the alternative, she would
undergo both rather than give up her constitu-
tional act.
/ have related these circumstances to this
House: hope they will go to the country:
trust this debate may be so reported, that every
man and every woman, ay, and every child that
can read, may read and reflect upon it. ANY
gentleman can verify the truth of the statements
! have made by looking at the public documents
containing the opinion of the South Carolina
Judge: and he will there find another part Of
the story, which have not mentioned, as fully
verified as the gentleman (Mr Holmes) admits
the part stated in relation to him to have been
true. will not now enter with that gentleman
on discussion Of the question whether the Off
cial opinion of a judge Of the Superior Court of
the United States from the bench, or the opin-
ions of ministerial law officer of this Govern
ment are to be the tests and standards of consti-
tutional law. say, however, that the people of
the State OF Massachusetts, and the people Of
all the free States of this Union, have right to
consider the decision Of the Judge as the law of
the land, and as the true and correct view of the
Constitution in the case. The gentleman from
South Carolina does not. He is satisfied, quite
satisfied il he can get an opinion of an Attorney
General. The thing, then, at last comes to this:
one man considers this to be the doctrine of the
Constitution, another thinks just the contrary
one man holds law constitutional another de-
clares it unconstitutional and so we come to
the doctrine, one advanced so Enthusiastically
by General Jackson, that every man is for the
Constitution as he understands it. The gentle
man from South Carolina is for the Constitution
as he understands it! "A Taught
A gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. FRENcH)
intimated to the House last evening few con-
stltutional opinions as he understands the Consi-
tuition. have some constitutional opinions too,
and so have the Legislature of Massachusetts,
The gentleman from Kentucky, as | understood
him, set his face against the resolutions from nv
State, which had the honor to present, as wholly
! unconstitutional.
W.T. NL1NNIl Saiu tIaL ne mad not SAID word
about the resolutions of Massachusetts but had
| briefly presented his views touching the uncon-
stitutonality of certain petitions or of their re-
ception by the House, 1.-THE Reporter cannot tell
which
Mr. ADAMS | am happy to hear he did not
| apply his remarks to the resolutions, but, as un
derNand him, to the whole of the petitions, which
ask Tor the same thing sought by those resolu-
tons. Now, to me, it appears that if it is uncon-
sttutlona in petitioners to ask for certain things,
It must be equally unconstitutional in the Legis
lature of Massachusetts to propose those same
things thing that is unconstitutional in itself,
is unconstitutional let who will ask or propose it.
Mr.. FRENCH, with Mr.. ADAMs's assent, again
lnterposed and explained, that in his remarks his
main object had been to show that Congress had
no power to abolish slavery in the district of Co.
lumbia, and, therefore, was not constitutionally
bound to receive petitions asking that they would
do