The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-08-08
DIsUNIoN.

OF notification which certainly stopped short OF dis
union, brought much od,um, for time at least,
upon Of the most upright and patriotic citizens
Of Southern States, another section Of our coun-
try has from the earliest period OF our national ex-
tence been accustomed to hold out threats OF sePa-
ration and disunon, matter of course, whenever
the policy of the General Government did not suit
its particular views and interests, however conforma
bic that policy might be with the interests and honor
of the nation al large and with the letter and spirit Of
the Constitution.
The late Matthew Carey in his Olive Branch,
states that the project Of separation of the States
was formed in New England shortly after the adop-
ton Of the Constitution and that in the year 1876,
most elaborate set Of papers was published in a
newspaper at Hartford in Connecticut the joint pro-
duction Of association Of men of the first talents
and influence in the State the object of which was
to encourage tho project Of separation, and to TO-
ment the prejudces of the People of New England
against their brethren of the South An extract
which be quotes from Of these papers is precise
ly in the style and temper of incendary Abolition
Address of the present day.
The same city of Hartford, some seventeen
eighteen years afterwards, acquired a more wide
spread aud durable renown for being the chosen seat
Of the deliberations of another conclaye Of traitors,
who plotting the overthrow Of the Government,
while the fleets of Great Britain were bombading
our cities and ravaging coasts. The pretext for
the project of separation, undertaken at such a
moment was, not that the Constitution the terms
of the national compact had been violated, but
merely difference Of opinion as to the policy of
the war
Am fhcRa Of thair arfv he Ee1e alpar
ty Of New England who had the grace at that time
to be ashamed of the infamy of such project I'M
dertaken at such moment, was Mr.. John Quincy
Adams, WHO did not scruple to denounce his former
associates. How far Mr.. Adams was induced to this
step by sincere pariotism and how far by desire
continue public life en- the broad theatre Of the
Union, might not now be question, but for the fact
that, since his forced retirement from any partcpa
ton in the Executive branch of the General Govern
ment, he has found bis chief amusement and solace
in endeavorng to revive the reasonable practices
which distinguished the friends of his youth His
course in Congress, during the last five six years,
has been such that nothing but the respect due to old
age, the high dignity which he once enjoyed, and a
charitable sui position that his intellects
what disordered, have saved him from such an
expression Of public opinion could not be mis-
taken.
But, however much Mr. Adams friends, or gen.
erous enemies, may attempt palliae his tansgres
sions, there is q method in his madness-a subtlety
In bis lnnacy-~hich, if few years more OF life
arc granted 10 him, and his is unchecked may
yet acquire for him whatever degree of fame or
fanny may be accorded by posterty to the destroyer
Of our Union. Certainly, If his sole object were TO
bring about its destruction he could not labor at il
with more untirng energy and more sleepless vigi-
lance than he does at present. He has fastened
with his whole dying strength and with the energy OF
desperation, upon the weak point Of our Union
that which exposes il to most danger both from for
eign and domestic foes-and seems determined, if not
able TO nfiict a mortal wound himself at least to lei
other enemies Of our Union, abroad and at home
know where its vital point lies. The most cnvem-
oned opponent Of our country's institutions in the
British Parliament, or in any Court of Europe could
not possibly have more jealous and efficient Co
adjutor.
His most elaborate demonstration against the in
tegry Of the Union is in the shape OF an ncepdary
manifesto, addressed 10 the People ofpe FREE States
@Ms Unson," which was published in the National
Intellgencer early in May, IS43, and is signed by
the CT President himself and twelve other members
OF the last Congress. The editors Of the Integen.
Ger expressed some reluctance in publishing ,h. doc
ument, solely because OF the address which il bear,
10 the People Of portion only Of the Unied States
A little reflection might have taught them, that
though the title would have been exceptonable in
any address OF political character as implying an
appeal 10 mere sectional feelings, the matter of
this address was liable TO much graver objections
than in title
The subject of the address is the annexation of
Texas 10 the Union. In the course of it, MIR. Ad-
dams quotes the following resolutions, which he Of
fersd in the House Of Representatives on the 2sth
Of February preceding;
Rsssped, That by the Constitution of the limited
Sates no power delegated TO their Congress or to
any department OF departments Of their Government
to ax TO this Union any foreign State or the people
thereof. 1922
/" R,soired, That any attempt of the Government of
the United States by an act OF Congress or by treaty
to to this Union the Republic of TEXAS or m.
people thereof, would be violation Of the Copsti,,
ton Of the United States, null and void. and 10
which the free States OF this Union and their peope
ought not TO submit"
tbs somewhat remarkable that the last of these
resolutions, framed by ex-Presdspt Of the United
States celebrated for his accurate KNOWLEDGE of con
stitntional law, as well as profound learning in ali
branches of political science, is nothing more nor
less than simple enumeration Of the doctrine of null,
ENesHo~--a doctrine which, when promulgated in
another section Of the country, was represented a.
not leas absurd and ridiculous, than criminal and
reasonable. But mere notification, in a case like
the present, would not answer Mr.. Adams purpose
or probably he would No content with it, and we
should, before long, find him ,riumphsntly replying
to mr.. weos'ers arguments against the doctrine
II would be adiffcult matter in practice for one or
moro States to annul law aonexing territory to
the Union II Is necessary, therefore, to proceed
. sep--snd very long step-bcyopd the d,c,r;ne If