Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1851-10-30


not i Just one. and that our government is
somsthing more than a sealed contract.
conditioned for the performance or non-Per-
Torrance Of specified acts. Butadmitung.for
the present.that the illustraiion is a just one,
we enquire If A & have not rights as well
CT Have they not the right to cona'der
whether or not they have violated the COW
%enant; and IL they think not-have they not
a right to hold c. amenable to thcm' for
his noncompliance Do they not exer
cisea right both Of Judgment and acton,
n first passing upon the conduct OF =,
then compelling him to appear before a
Court Of Justice. They havedone all, that,
as men, they have the power or right to
do. How would it be with Statcsi Would
they not have an equal right with A and
B, to consider the right. the propriety and
the consequences Of such an act. in any one
State, as might injuriously affect their W
intercstsl And having that right, have
they not also the incident one of acting to
prevent or remedy the injuryi States hav-
ing no such facilities for redress as A and
3 had in the case supposed. they must act
in such manner, only, as States and govern
ment can act, to-wit-assert their rights
and maintain them with their power.
To make this principle more distinct IN
its application to States, let us take another
illustration: England, France and Spain,are
independent and sovereign powers. Sup
pose them to have formed a league, and IN
the progress of time to have differed IN re-
gard to the terms of the compact, and the
rights remaining to each of the cove
nanting parties. Spain,the weakest power
asserts that her rights and interests have
b~eenneglected ortrenched upon. England
and France assert the contrary. Spain
Judges for herself, but may not the other
contracting parties do the same thing!-
And is not their decision, that the terms oil
the league have been faithfully adhered to,
entitled to as much weight.as the contrary
opinion Of Spain! Acting upon her judg-
ment,S Spain refuses any longer to be bound
by the terms of the compact. which she al
legcs has been violated, but acting upon
their equal right to judge,the other parties
to the league may force her to comply
with its provisions, maintaining that it has
been complied with, on their part.
The equal right of all the parties cannot
give to either party superior or exclusive
right; which would be the case, if the two
were to be bound by the judgment. and
the action of the one. Is the action ola
single State, to be taken invariably as
right, and the action Of the other States
uniformly as wrong-such would be the
inference, if the Federal Government were
coppellable. by silence and non-action, to
endorse the course Of the seeding State.
If we are right in our position, thai
Spain.a government which had not ever
parted temporarily with any of the pow
ers of sovereignty, could not have with,
drawn from the league without a%ccounta
bility to England and France-how much
more strongly will the principle apply te
the respective States Of our Confederacy
Ours is not a simple league between States
each ofwhich retains all the attributes oI
sovereignty, but a constitutional Gocern-
mcnt. embracing all the people of the coun-
try-to form which, the States parted
with all power except that which was nc
cessary to regulate their own local and
interior concerns. If. therefore,one Of these
States should, in theexercise ofitsjudgmcnt
decide thatthe constitutional la bcenvioiated
by 'the other party,"-(thc Co-Statcs)-
she could not exercise either the right OF
secession or notification, without admitting
the corresponding and equal right of "the
other party" to make up a judgment, and
act upon it also. 1t is only IN the absurd
supposition that a majority ofthe States iii
not all except the refractory one) could be
brought to siultify themselves, by acknowl-
edging that they had acted opprcssivcly
that a State would be allowed peaceaJly
TO secedc; and, we apprehend, that if a
majority of the States could be made to
understand and admit, that they had inHic-
ted injury and practised oppression upon
one of the sister States, they would not re-
fuse to repair the INJUSTICE; and thus the me-
cessity for secession would pass away,and
with it the disposition.
But this, it would be unreasonable to
expect. A very little knowledge of Gov
eminent, and a slight acquaintance with
the springs that move and regulate human
conduct, would teach us, thatthe majority
would be more apt to believe themselves
right, than the dissatisfied State. Adverse
conclusions resulting from an equal right
to Judge, and an equal confidence in the
correctness ofthcir ownjudgment. wouldin-
evitably lead to collision and hostilities, to
be adjusted only on the field of battle.
But it is common to speak of the Fede-
raj Government, as contra-d distinguished
from the States, and instead of calling il
the oppression of the other States. and ac-
knowledging the equal rights ofthc other
States, shallow-thinkers or insincerc quib-
blcrs talk of the expressions Of the Fed
eral Government. and deny its right to
judge and act. To this we would answer,
that the Federal Government, according
to the very resolutions of Mr.. Jefferson,
which we have been considering. is treated
Of as the agent of the States. If the a.
gent may have transcribed its powers, the
proper remedy would seem to be, not a
Withdrawal from the other States, but, a
| disa vowal and rencal Of the agents nets LIZ