Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1851-06-21
JUDGE CRANCH ON THE FRIGHT OF
SECESSION"
FROM THE NEW YORK EXPRESS.

FROM THE NEW YORK EXPRESS.
One of the sbest papers upon the subject of
trulay asto the right OF secsssionhas just been written by
Chief Justice CRAscH, Of the District Of Columbia who has
happily far recovered from illness Of six months, with
occasional though partial restoaons be able his
PEN send for the Express the manuscript of this brief
gument upon an important public question, which is
causing much anxiety here and the South Here the
article, which, though written for publication am sure
will meet with public acceptance. E.B.
THE ALLEGED GRIEVANCES OF 8. CAROLINA.
BY CHIEF JUSTICE CRANcH.
Since the elaborate discussions which have been
had, both in and out Of Congress- in relation to the
complaints Of South Carolina, il has become mani
fest that she has only one pretended grievance to
complain of against the United States and that is,
that the balance of political power has changed,
and South Carolina finds herself in minority,
SO that she can no longer WELD the power Of the
United States to the accomplishment of her par
ticular views. She finds that, as part of the
United States she has duties TO perform under the
ConstitSton and Laws which she may be COM
PEELED ID perform while she continues in the Union.
She therefore threatens to Withdraw and claims
right te reassume the position she occupied before
she adopted the Constitution Of the United States,
and eyen before the old Articles of Confederation
that s to be an independent sovereign State with
out control This she claims to be, and as such to
be capable Of forming new associations, domestic
and fbreign, for the maintenance of her indepen-
dence. The question then arises, Can she do SO
The grievance is that she can no longer WELD
the power Of the United States because she is in
the minority. She demands present protection
from the acts Of the majority, and security for the
future. There never was time when she was a
perfectly independent sovereign State. She never
had the power to form foreign alliances or to raise
and maintain armies and navies. She had no such
power under the Royal Government and if she
had, she transferred it, with all her rights of war
and peace, and her right to form foreign associa-
tons, to the Congress of the Confederation but,
however that may be- her grievance is, that, accord
ing to the great republican rule and maxim, with
out which there can be no republican Government,
she is bound to submit to the will of the majority,
consttutionally and lawfully expressed. If she
repudiates that maxim, as in practice she proposes
to do, what sort Of Government will it bel 1t must
be minority Government; and what is a monarchy
or an aristocracy but Government by minority
There is no provision in the Constitution by
which South Carolina can repudia.e or abandon the
Union The doctrine of Republicanism is that the
which il is said in England that the King can
do no wrong, and for the same reason: be-
cause there can be no legal remedy. The
ultimate sovereignty resides in the majority. Re-
publicanism also supposes that the majority will
exercise its power discreetly, and for the public
good and, if the minority should be Of opinion that
It is not so exercised, their remedy is only at the
bsllot-box or by revolution. Butrevouton can only
be justified by insuferable injuries. Such injuries
have not yet been inflicted nor, by the Constitution
and Laws of the United States, construed by the
Judiciary can they be inflicted by the United States
The complaint is what the lawyers call qua inaet.
South Carolina pretends that she fears that Con-
gress will do what il has not the power to do, and
she claims to have security for the future. She is
not content to wait until Congress shall threaten to
do her some great and insuferable injury. but upon
suggestion only that as the balance of political
power in the United States is changed, OF is about
to be changed, the new majority may disregard the
Constitution and Laws, and trample upon the rights
Of the minority. Alarmed at the possibility of such
a course of proceedings, she now rushes mady
from the Union, and plunges into the abyss of poll
teal anarchy, without reasonable hope of thereby
obtaining relief from the evils which she anticipates.
In paroxysm of fear she throws away her only
shield against the fanaticsm of the North, which is
the most powerful foe with whom she is contending.
For this she has no color Of right under the Con-
stitution, nor under the Virginia resolutions Of
1898, drawn up by Mr.. Madison, the father and
advocate of the Constitution. The question which
drew forth those resolutions was, whether portion
of the people of the United States less than majo
rity could decide and declare for itself an act of
Congress to be unconstitutional and therefore refuse
10 obey it; and to that extent the resolutions 60,
and no further. They do not say that by such re-
fsal the Union is dissolved, or that the recusant
portion of the United States may therefore with
draw from the Union, and abandon the Constitution
which its friends, and Mr.. Madison at the head of
them labored so hard and struggled so long to OBJ
tain At that time no one for moment entertain
ed the thought that every State as soon as she
found herself in minority at the ballotbox, had a
right to withdraw from the Union. The remedy
for the passing of an unconstitutional act of Con-
gress is, by those resolutions, supposed to be the
right to refuse to execute it. the right of nulli6ca-
ton only, not the dissolution of the Union; and
even this right Of notification does notarise, accord
ing to the terms Of the resolution, but in the case
" deliberate, palpable, and dangerous breach of
g the Constitution, by the exercise of powers not
q granted to it. 1t must be case not of alight and
transient nature, but Of nature dangerous to the
:. great purposes for which the Constitution was
g established" {" It must be case, moreover, not
obscure or doubtful in its construction. but plain
" and palpabR. Lastly, it must be case not re-
" sutinp from partial consideration or hasty de-
g termination, but case stamped with final con-
" sideration and deliberate adherence" These are
stated in the resolutions themselves, of 1885,, not
as Unsuitable grounds Of dissolution Of the Union
- -.,,de of roccta - If some I'm cons titution-