The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-02-12


he moved reconsideration Of tho vote, ordering
the bill 10 third reading.
MIR. lNGE moved to lay that motion upon the
table. Carried-yeas 92--nsys 81
| Mr.. lNGE then moved to lay the bill on the
table, Carred--yeAs l0O--nays SO.
YEAs-Messrs. Albertson, Allen, Ashs, Az
erett, Bay, Bayly. Beale. Bell, Bingham. Bowli",
Boyd, Brown Of Mississippi, Buel, Burt, Gable,
Cald well, Campbsll, Cartier, Clarke, Cobb, Col
cock, Daniel, Danner, Dsberry, Dimmiek, Dun
ham, Durkee, Fea,herston, Pitch, Fowler, Fuller,
Gerry, Giddings, Gilmore. German, Hall, Hamil-
ton, Hnralson, Harlan, Harris Of Tennessee, Har-
rs OF Alabama, Harris Of Illinois, Hubbard. Hun
ter, lnge, Jackson Of Georgia, johnson Of Ten
nessee, Julian, Letter. Lit,le6eld. Mann OF Penn
sylvsnia, Marshall. Mason, Ms.teson, McDon-
land, McMulIen, Mc(lusea. Melville, Miller Of
Ohio, MllisoD, Morris, Morrison, O'ds, Orr, Otis,
Outlaw, Parker, Peaslee, Penn, PhsIps. Richard
son, Robbins. Ross, Sackstt, Savage, Sawtele.
Schoocratt, Sylvester, SpaIding, Sprague, Stanton
of Kentucky, Stephens, Stetson, Sweetser, Tho
Pennsylvania, Van Dyke, Walden, Waldo, Wal
lace, Wellborn. Whittlesey, Widrick, Williams,
| Wilmot, Young 100
| NAYs--Messrs. Alexander, Aston, Anderson,
Andrews, Ashmun. Bennett, Bocock, Bokee,
Booth, Bowie, Brock, Briggs. Brisbin. Brown Of
North Carolina, Calvin, Casey, Chandler, Cling
man, Congsr, Corwin, Crowell, Dickey, Dixon,
Duer, Duncan, Edmundson, Eliot, Evans Of
Maryland, Evans of Ohio, Ewing, Gentry, Gil
bert, Goodenow, Cot. Gould ,GrnnelI. Holloway,
Hammond, Hay, Raymond. Henry, Hilliard.
Jackson of New York, Johnson Of Kentucky,
Johnson of Arkansas, King OF Rhode Island,
King ofNew Jersey, John A King, Preston King,
Levin, Mann OF Massachusetts, McClernand,
McGaughey, McHssock, McLane Of Kentucky,
Meac ham, Moore, Morehead. Nelson, Ogle. Peck,
4 hmm Do. Ill d.
nolds, Risey, Robinson, Rockwell. Rose, Rum
sey, Schenck. Schermerhorn, Seldom, Sheppard,
Stanly, Stevens, Ia ior, Thompson Of eniucky,
Thurman, Underhill, Venabe, Vinton, Watkins,
Wentworth, White,-96.
Mr. lNGE moved to reconsider the VOTE and
lay the motion upon the table. Carried
| The House then adjourned.
NonrH CARoL,xA-TnE RIonr or SxcEss,os.
The Enquirer" finds Mares rest in the vote
of the North Carolina senate on the doctrine of
secession. But he does not understand the prin-
cpe OF the vote, or at least does not state it, Thrt
body, as we understand, denied that secession
was constitutional right''-but il did not deny
the right of State to secede An act that breaks
! up the Constitution so far as seeding State is
concerned, may not perhaps be in strict language,
termed constitutional act. 1t is an act super
constltutional-an act of a sovereignty, possess
ing reserved and inherent powers, above and OUT
side of the Constitution. But ii is a RIGHT; and
| such right, as once Denied makes the federal
government as perfect central despotism as that
ofthe Russian Czr. An able writer in the Dem
ocrauc Review Ia periodical, by the way, which
ought to be in the hands of every Southern man
who values constitutional principles, and admires
| ability In their vindication) in late number, puts
this question in the following light:
Now, in relation to the right Of a State to Sc
cede from the Union, or to redress injuries to her
sovereignty by any other means in her power.
the right Is not constitutional, any more than our
original revolution loyal, or than our war or
1912 was comfortable to the de6nitive treaty made
with Great Britain in 1883, and which stipulated
| for perpetual peace. The right Of secession
is nevertheless perfect, being among the inalien-
able rights referred to in the Declaration of In
| dependence; and with which, it SAYS, we are en-
dowed by our Creator. Enumerated among ihess,
are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;'
and whenever any form of government becomes
destructive ofthese ends is the right Of the peo-
Pile to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new
government. -
We all feel tina ,secess on is practicable, and to
urge discontinuance of further annoyances
against the South, we have lately seen numerous-
y attended "Unlon meetings, in our large COM
mercia cities and their influence will be salutary;
but the parties seem not to have probed to the
bottom of the difficulty. Indeed, the superficial
views which these meetings take of the difficulty
of our position is plainly indicative that the ma.
ture Of our confederacy is too little understood by
| present
DESTROYS of avertng it; but they seem moved
thereto more by fear of consequences than convic-
zion of error in the principle from which the dan
ger has arisen. They cry aloud for Union and
some would fight for it, but these are not the
ways, Especially the lauer) of obtaining it; and
| humanity may rejoice that it is not. But especial-
| ly they seem not to know that slavery agitation Is
only the symptom of disease, not the disease
itself The disease is loose construction of the
Constitution, and the remedy is strict construc-
ton. Slavery is only the symptom Of to-day, az
a protective tariff was the symptom Of 1892, and
| as great system ofinternal improvement by tie
general government may be the symptom to-mor-
row. The friends OF Union, therefore, should un
dersand that they must be constructionists of the
Constitution, if they would be Union men in an
Intelligent, pervading and enduring sense.
Now, although right is right, and no man
| can desire more than 'perfect right" vet we go
further than this writer. We hold that the right
of secession is a constitutional right. The first
Congress that assembled under the Constitution,
(March 4,h 1887 added the following amendment
10 that instrument, which was subsequently, duly
ratified
"The powers not delegated to the United States
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively or
the people"
Now the right of secession was not prohibited
by the Constitution TO any State; did any State
delegate to the United States the power to prevent
IFS, ciruI'y IcSeI'eu TtSnt III the
States. But to put this matter beyond dispute.
we cite fact, connected with the history Of
those times, that three States at least land New
York was one Of them) refused 10 adopt the Con-
stituton and go into the confederacv, except on
condition that they should have the right to leave
it whenever they thought proper And being re-
ceived into the Union on that condition, the bene-
fit of the stipulation, of course, Injured all other
partr ers.
1t takes Rderoiia to dispute the right orse-
cession
But we are to understand that the enquirer
is against the doctrine Of secession II so, we ad-
wise the editor to re-pursue his latest political creed
adopted for him at Milledgeve only few weeks
ago. The fourth resolution Of the Union conven-
ton lays down the doctrine pretty strong, We
think, albeit it is secession in the pa,lo port ia
ture tense. Here il is:
Fourth!y, That the State Of Georgia, in the
judgment Of this convention, yH and ought 10 re-
sis eren Gas asi RESORT 10 disruption cftrerytie
rhich binds her to the Union, any action If Con-
gress upon the subject of slavery in the District