The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-03-19

rights are reserved TO each State separately. and
certsin rights are granted ~ them all collectively,
the latter TO BIZ exercised in = prescribed mode:
and that M there IL an admitted right OF State
to Judge Of it, reserved powers there Is an equal
right Of States, one or more, to Judge Of the
rights granted them by the Constitution. Well,
IL this be so, 1t " AZ fatal to the exercise of the
granted powers ~ the reserved. For il the
holders Of the granted powers may judge and
decide for themselves. 10 ~ to prevent the
holders Of the reserved powess from exerting
them, 70 may the latter prevent the former from
sxerting theirs. In such case, both classes Of
rights would be destroyed. which would be alb
surd. Bot supposing the case to arise, and the
two parties decide each for itself adversely to the
other: whichever undertook to enforce It's deci-
sion by arms would be in the wrong, for IL would
assail the other for the exercise Of an acknowl-
edged night. II, therefore, State were to &C.
cede, the first test that would occur, practically,
would be In the collection by the State Of duties
imports from countries foreign to both parties.
And If the seeding State were acknowledged
by foreign governments, It could collect peace
ably--and any attempt to collect under pretence
Of federal authority, would have to be by force,
which would be wrongful. On the other hand,
II the seeding State undertook to collect duties
from vessels of the other States, they might be
refused, and it would have to resort to force
which on the assumption of the writer Of g Madi-
son., would also be wrongful. But the practi-
cal evil would be slight, for the result would be
that free trade would remain between all the
States
The writer of Madison" after admitting the
right of each party to decide for itself, asks:
" What then? Does il follow that this determi-
nation of each for itself will bind all BY no
MEANS" And he imputes this assumption that
each binds all, to Mr.. CALHOUN. which he says
being false, is the key error of that ingenious
argument. Now, we deny that any such assump-
ton is made by Mr.. CALHOUN, and we assert that
it is made by the writer of 9 Madison" We
claim that the decision of the seceding State
binds itself only, and affects Others only SO far
as the exercise of any right by any body or per-
son, affects others. The writer Of Madison
admits that an individual may expatrate himself.
Can it be said with any propriety of language
that by expatriating himself from country, a
man binds all the twenty millions Of people he
secedes from If not it cannot be said of a
State. But if the man or the State is compelled
by force to remain against his or her will, by the
other party, then that party which is one party
undertakes most emphatically to bind all, and
runs into the very absurdity which Madison
condemns, of making the determination Of
each for itself bind ALL"
The writer of Madison" commences with
admitting the right of each State to judge for
itself of its reserved rights--and ends with as
serting the right of the federal government, OF
of other States to set aside its decision by force
That is precisely the principle on which the EN-
peror of Russia governs his serfs. serf may
judge for himself and may decide for himself
but if he differs from the Emperor, and attempts
to act on his own decision, he has one musket
and the Emperor million. ] his is a brilliant
idea of the right of a sovereign State-deduced
from the Kentucky resolutions!
In all the relations of life, rights and duties
will frequently appear to conflict. In all such
cases, the difficulty will be solved by respecting
not the number, or force of the parties concerned
but the relative value and sanctity of the princi
pies involved. Where there is a seeming con-
fict between reserved rights and granted rights
the former, as obviously the most important and
| fundamental, must prevail. Where one party
asserts the right of self-government, and the
other the right of governing others, the right Of
sef-government must prevail. Where there ia
dispute between an agent and one of its prin
cipals, as to delegated power, the presumption
must be in favor of the principal.
| This doctrine, even when carried to its ex
IRENE, and applied to an individual, is recognized
in the right Of expatriation-a right so perfect
as TO involve only the mere Inconvenience Of
converting his fixed property, il he have any
into movable: and that because it would b.
impossible to remain and be independent. How
monstrous is it to deny to State what is con.
| ceded to an individual and that too on such
| slender pretences as the mere inconvenience of
altering an arbitrary geographical boundary, ant
the loss to the remaining States Of the claim o.
governing in few cases the seeding State
a claim, or power, which is mere trust
Of which, by every principle, the State is the
beneficiary, and of whose benefits she is unques
tionaby the best and the only judge.
The writer of " Madison says Let not the
hazards of rebellion be taken away" We say
let no right, certainly not the right Of self-gov
eminent, be assailcd with force. 1t would be
monstrous in people pretending to be free, to
employ the bayonet in settling question on
which CALHOUN and TAzEwELL took one side
and WEBSTER and CLAY the other.
Reviewing Reviewer
As the ard-pressed stag will sometimes stand
at bay and gore his hunter, so will the exas