The southern press., 1851-09-01

repeal, would not the obligation Of the govern
ment 10 punish such resistance rebeIliou-
and reasonable, be weighty and rs stringent
(according to your doclrine) to punish suct
resistance for any other caus Is not this
fairly put, general Can you in capdor den,
that il is a consequences of your creed Nov
does not this doctrine, fully carried out, max,
the government absolute When the Congress,
and the Judiciary concur in an act, what limit
what check can you conceive to its powers
OF course | mean always upon your principles
II is useless TO press the argument further
Behold then the difference between the exercise
of secession as an acknowledged political right
and the exercise OF il as an act Of revolution
The o,e 3 a check--the only effective check
to powerful, ambitious, and rapidly centralis
ing government. A peaccable resort to oul
original status revolutionizing nothing, de-
stroying nothing, shedding no blood, confiscat-
ing no property. Tne other leads to centrali
zaton, to despotism, to endless strife, or tt
a stsgnant, passive, and dead submission.
Now, here is far more important issue thar
any heretofore made. The admission of Cali
forna the whole South complained OF as 4
wrong, but majority of the Southern States
held that it was wrong that could be compro
missed for. But You cannot cure denial OF the
right of State secession by compromise, for il
involves radical change of the spirit and es
sence of the government This issue Is moi
only in the highest degree Important, but il is
recent also. Voters have not declared theil
opinions on it yet 1t has no connection what
ever with the compromise measures, or any
other issue which has as yet been made. A
mar may detest the adjustment measures, md
yet deny the right of State to evade their effect
by secession or he may be willing to acquiesce
in these measures, and yet be prepared to assert
to the last extremity the right of State to se-
cede from the Union. The question il destined
to produce complete fusion and reformation OF
parties. Half tho Wings Of the South affirm
this right, whilst many Democrats, Especially
the Proclamation Democrats, MS they are called, }
deny it, ct them deliberate well before they
precipitatey and rashly take stand which may
place them forever in false position. In this
daring attempt to revolutonze the fundamental
principles, the very groundwork of our govern
ment and to convert it into despotism of num-
bers, State-rights men, whether Wings or DEM
ocrats, compromise or anti-compromise men,
she uld forget all party ties and party names, and
make bold, determined, and united stand for
the preservation Of this, the most important
citadel of Southern rights. heard you, with
rprse, at Yazoo City, deny that any Democrat
had ever contended for the right of State to
peaceabe secession--as a procedure not in con-
travention of the Cons tuition It is true that
no party has jus. claim to an erclusire prop
erty in this doctrine. 1t had sometimes found
countenance and favor with the Wings, whilst
rejected and denied by distinguished Democratic
leaders. This was especially the case in the
disastrous days of the proclamation and Of the
force bill
But to contend that no Democrat has ever
publicly favored it, is position strangely in
consideratc and incantious for statesman so
discerning and sagacious Democratic statesmen
of the highest character, even Democratic States,
have given proof of their adherence to the doc
trine. When Jackson thundered from the
White House that federal document called
"the proc!a.raton;" Virginia. Justly alarmed,
repudiated its doctrine, by solemn act of
her legislature, which was unanimously passed,
if my memory serves me. The Richmond En-
quirer denounced in trumpet tones the deep
and dangerous tenor of its principles, and the
democratic press generally, echoed the voice of
the Richmond Enquirer. Even the men who
hailed it at first Qe away by their devotion to
Jackson) renourced it afterwards as wrong and
pernicious and in few months after its publ
cation, the rank and file of the Democratic party
entirely abjured it as political heresy. Randolph,
Giles, Macon, Taylor, Roane, Tazewell, have
all testified in beha Of this right--repudating
at the same time GALL but one of them-Mr.
TazewellD the right of State to nullfy
law of the United States and yet to continue
IN the Union. Permit me this question, general
What is the meaning of Kentucky and of Viz
ginia when they assert in their famous resolu-
tIons OF 9S, the right of State to nterpose its
sovereign authority, and to declare law of the
United States null and of no force? These re.
solutions were cautiously drawn; they were
drawn as you know by Jefferson and Madison.
What Is the meaning of the above language
You will not say ii means to assert the right Of
as it ia called. Must it not then
mean to assert the right of secession! For how
can State interpose its sovereign authority and
declare a law of Congress void, except by either
remaining in the Union and nulifying the law,
or by taking the first step towards going out
OF the Union with view TO bring about a re-
peal of the obnoxious lawi You have your
choice of the horns of the dileMm1--for vou
will scarcely be able to deduce from the lang-
guage and spirit of these celebrated documents.
an assertion of the right of secession "a 70.
remedy. ] have done with the
subject
you expressed the idea that the difference be-
tween us, respecting the right of State secession,
was difference upon point merely abstract
and that in the application of the theory of either
Of US, the results and the consequences would
be the same II was TO combat this idea ms
well as publicly TO express for myself (what you
say IN your note you are in the habit of publicly
expressing for me)--my own opinions-that
have written this letter, you may not be so clear
ly OF opinion now shat the proposed conven-
ton of Mississippi and Carolina" is the only
point left open batween the two parties now
contending for victory in Mississippi We State
rightsrnen think that it is of primary Importance
that The convention in November shall distinctly
affirm the right of State secession, and deter
mlnaiion to stand by any State that may choose
to exercise 1t. Nor is this 'the only really prac-
teal point left upon between the parties now
contendng for victory in Mississippi" There
are Others; but they have been too often and
too thoroughly examined by our public speakers
to authorize notice of them here 1t is the
denial of the sovereignty of the States (the de-
nial of the right of secession involves denial of
their sovereignty which is at last to unite (n
my opinion) the unhappy and ds,racted Sonth