Daily Richmond times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1849-1850, 1850-06-04
To the Editors of the Times

referred 10 natOnal IeglSlatlon. cautious socude,
wise forecast yea the principles of setexistence invest
this vital issue with the most fearful responsibilities
due and patriotic regard for the Union the one hand
and hrm and unprecedented assertion of State remedies
on the other, should awaken in the popular mind the
most rigid sentiments of national patriotism and State
| loyalty An error now, when so much of passion and
prejudice invests the slavery question with Of in
dvldual application to every citizen Of the country may
prove fatal to the Union, and would certainly involve the
different States in an irrerevable bluuder In such
period OF rational gloom and individual socude every
proper effort should be made to weaken oca preudces
and strengthen the moral force of every legal remedy
When the passions OF great people are arayed in open
conflict, and one oca interest is made the
oil injury to another it is needless effort to seek
porary remedies. An appeal to one of two sources Of
relief will follow angry dscussion-the final arbi-
traent OF legal and constitutional tribunals competent
| 10 decide, or to revolutionary measures. Such is
the pTesent.pQstre ct the Federal and State Govern
ments.
1t may not be amiss one so retired as the wri-
ter OF this communication, to recall public attention
from the OF angry local STRIFE the consideration
of those remedies plainly and distinctly observant in
the frame work and foundation oour admirable system
OF National and State Governments Let every patriot
pause and contemplate the fearful responsibilities which
he must assume in adopting any line of action upon this
question as freeman, endowed by his peculiar rights
and present position, with the duciary interests OF pos
tery and the voary OF liberty in every cline, he should
welLsurvey the vast field of action which lies before
him .betore he deliberately resolves his final line of
policy.
What are the evils complained of? Wherein lie the
legitimate remedies against their banefu consequences
if allowed longer to Cypress the slave holding inter-
ests9
The slavery question, as it is now presented, wears
fold aspect the directly affecting the subject
matter in the States, the other sort of dervatve
implied interest the Shareholder possesses in the terri
tories of the Federal Government These two interests
as they tall under the question OF remedies, entirely
distinct shall first notice the question: directly af
tectng the question OF slavery exists the States
As this branch of the subject it is manifest that no
act Of the Federal Government has been consummaed
which practically affects the question. All the legsa
A.
point OF view, have been committed by the nonslave
holding States. AS respects these States and the slave
holding States thus affected it is certain that each sepa
rate State so acting and acted upon independent
political sovereignty. The question: then, in its pract
cal bearings one between independent political
verelgntes bound together, it is true, by compact of
national federation Iheimportant proposition at
occs how far under our system OF National and States
Government, each Of the States in the Union invest
ed with the attributes and rights Of sovereignty
spects each other
The 10th article of the amendments to the federal
constitution affords ready and safe answer to this
question lhe powers not delegated TO the United
States by the constitution, prohibited by it to the
States reserved to the States respectively, the
people" Such is the chart of "poUers, respective
y belonging to the United States and to the States
respectively. Have the States, by the constitution ei-'
Their directly by implication granted to the United
States any powers" which divest them of the inhe-
rent right of selfproecon against internal domestic
assaults from sister State As regards the Omitted
States each State is invested with limited rights of So
vereignty SECTION 10th of article IL of the constitution
prohibitSto the States certain specified immunes of
sovereignty "No State shall enter into any treaty. al
lance or confederation" &c This section of the con-
sttuon contains all the restrictions imposed upon the
States by the constitution which limits their rights of
bon to the States which dvess them of the inherent
right OF preserving the property and protecting the nte
rest OF their citizens 1t then manifest that
of the States OF the Union invested with the
power to divest the property interests OF citizens OF
or more OF the other States, by peculiar system
: of legislation, calculated and designed to be directly
destructive OF the property thus assaed and is equally
manifest that the State States whose rights OF
regnty thus assailed have the clear right pow.
adopt and enforce system of remedial and pre-
ventive legislation As to this question the States thus
brought into open legislative conflict purely sovereign
and there prohibitory limitations in the constu-
ton restricting the right thus seek redress by local
| legislation.
Let supposed case test the principle. Take New
York and Virginia. The laws of New York, by sort
OF extradition, claim to dvest the ownership of the
master in his slave the bondsman touches her
soil She thus brings her stautary laws in direct open
conflict with the property and rights of Virginia
and her citizens. Here case is presented, which prac
tcay tests the rights OF sovereignty" as between these
f States The acts of New York operate serious and
vital injury the interests and sovereignty of Virginia
Has she or not the inherent right of Sovereignty
assert her right of territorial urisd lotion over her
Own property, that of her citizens2 Is this Fright
of sovereignty" prohibited TO her" under the federal
constitution? II not it is reserved to her."
Here let contrast the OF State redress with
that of the proposed Nashville Convention. In the
case, as between New York and Virginia. where each
State resting on the inherent rights of sovereignty fully
belonging to both, to each other, SO far the
exercise of legal legislative modes OF redress
cerned, n-the~ event OF Legislative conflict, there
would be common umpire accessible to both and pos
sesslng intrinsic authority over both-the national will
under the federal constitution. Both States, in such
conflict, would be an the Union and under the cOnStl
tuition; each would have common measure of redress
and each be under the influence OF that mutual source of
remedial legislation Whereas, in the proposed COME
deration, agreement, conventional compact OF all the
Southern States, as is proposed the constitution would
be violated the standard OF implied revolution hoisted
A corresponding convention OF the non-saveholding
States would in the event OF conflict, tending to prac
teal action inevitably involve the sections Of the
Union in open hostility, if not civil war
Here then, is a case in which the mode and mea
sure oil redress is clearly within the States, long
they act under their State authority by quiet and
peaceabe legislation; this too WITHOUT violating the te
dera constitution ventuTing on revolutionary ground
Apply these principles to any and all legislation at
fecng slavery as exists 10 the States, and would
seem plain that every legislative encroachment by the
erests of the saveholdng States could be constitution
ally redressed by individual State action. The same
views plainly indicate the same means and mode of
redress" in the event of national legislation.
When the reserved rights of the States' the in
herent sovereignty of single State violated, by
law OF the fedora government the constitution and sys
tenn OF our confederation plainly designates the pro-
per means OF redress long the State injured
keepsw the circle OF the constitutional restrictions
The law so passed be referred State resistance
to mutual tribunal equally the agent and legal repos-
tory OF the Federal government and the resisting State
and whose peculiar function it is to solve, adjust and
adudge such cases OF legal or constitutional conflict be-
tween the Federal Government and of the States
or between any two or more OF the States.
Then, in either event, long direct open revolu-
ton avoided, all these questions, as between the differ
en States, and any all OF them and the Federal
government could be legally and coustitutonally adj
Jusied In the last resort.
But, applied to the present question, now being so
angry discussed it may be asked, how is Virginia to
! redress herself! The answer is plain Let her dis
cad all idle popular excitement convoke her people in
State convention, duly summoned for the purpose, and
resolve under her own flag, her own soil 10 protect
the inherent rights of sovereignty vested in her. Let
her. by fundamental law plant her standard OF legal
resistance all Federal encroachments upon the sure
foundation OF her reSerued Of sovereignty under
law redress her grievances against all offending States
Let the voice of enlightened patriotism still the demon
of party and rebuke the spirit OF revolution Under her