The primitive Republican. (Columbus, Miss.) 18??-1852, 1852-01-22


liA -
efct Qsss ssa 81 q 0ao
ecls ttdl sos ia aseised
Ho desired d know Il any reasonable man
could he Be disposed to8afd q government
which made VA and carnage the only means
of supporting itself . government that
could exist only BY the sword2 Every such
war, saidhe would involve Gle innocent with
the guilty Naturalization aso Asoata
b saBieieat & sp0se euel.)t Deetesa G
qqaiasl gQeeraa,sa,
Aatlio iatilelse q tla ePeD
So sd Halils tom ~ head
ated the Existence Of 3 elulon invest
letu pegs turn TO Q more Feeent pe1ioa'
ol qua coin history, in search of int'tileE
Confirmation 81 our views.
n tie eeurseof debate, which occurred
in the snato 81 the.U. S. il 1888, on bill
introduced 81 Mr. Wilkins, chairman Of the.
Jadiclary committee, to provide for the col
Section duties, Mr. Webster entered very
lafgely into the powers Of the General Coy
ernment He spoke Of the necessity Of SUI
porseding the confederation, By irregular
government, because under the articles ct
confedefs ion, If Congress made acquisitions
% the States, and they declined, there was
no remedy but nar, against such delinquent
States He, also, deprecated the existence
If suc power, and argued the propric y
Of setting aside system Of government, re-
Equiring resort to harsh and bloody action.
Tic declared It was evident a eonfederacy
could not long hold together, which should
I Be at war with its members. That the cons
stitution was adopted toayoid this necessity
That its trainers gave this reason, for their
work in the nosl emphatic manner.
In explanation of the reasons, which led
the Federal Convention, to recommend the
constitution, lie addueed the authority Of
Samuel johnson and Oliver Ellsworth, who
were members of that body, as well as, Of
the ratifying convention Of the State Of Con-
nccticut He represented Mr.. johnson as
proceeding to say
The Federal Convention saw the imper-
fiction, existing in the Confedcracy, in at
tempting to lcgislate for States IL their POI
Eliticol capacity. The constitution vests in
the general legislature the power to make
laws in matters Of national concern to APP
point judges to decide upon those laws and
to appoint officers to carry them into exeeu-
ton Tbs erclades theidea IF armed .tosee.
The force aelti'cl. Is % Be employed Is tie en-
erag ct tde Tar, and this force is to operate
only on fndtridVals, Who fail in their duty
T to their country. This is the peculiar glory
of the constitution, that it depends upon the
otild and equal energ.yof the magistraey for
the execution of the laws"
IIe,also, quoted Mr Ellsworth as saying
/ SIIence, We see how necessary for the Tn
ion IS q coereiye principle. The only ques-
ton is, shall it be a coercion Of law or a co
ercion Of arms am f0r q COERCION b.
lar thlt coercion lrtiicd acts only on dc-
finqaeat t.aRiesdpals.. This constitution docs
not attempt to coeree sorerctiga 5odtes, StafeS,
n their political capacity. If We should
I attemp, to execute the laws Of the onion, by
sending an armed fierce, against a delinquent
State, it would involve the good with the
bad-thc innocent with the guilty, in the
same calamity. But this legal coercion sta-
giles ont the iudtriduat and Furnishes him for
violating the laws of the Union
Thus spoke two of Connecticut most tai
ontcd and accomplished sons, in the conyen-
ton she had called, to ratify the oonstitu-
ton. We do not huop, that Mr.. Webster
fully endorsed their particular views, but w
do contend, that we find them Incorporated
: in his speech to which We have alluded.
f From this brief analysis of the views q
Those, who framed and defended the consti
tuition, We may justly assume, that the Gen
eral Government, has no power to coeree By
: military force, any sovereign Statesof thi'
Union; and that, the only coercion recog
missed by the constitution, in the execution
of the laws of the Union, is that Of the ssnlil,
land equal energy of the law.
s Itlnay be time, that the citizen ineurs
3 direct responsibility, to the General Govern
nent, for the violation Of m act Of Con
I gress, for which be has no warrant undo
the law Of his State but ifsuch State war
: rants his resistance to scch law Of Congress
and he acts inobedience to her mandate, th
,State and notthe eitiSen should answer ID
consequences Of his conduct can fin
{ ne apology for . different responsibility 9
the citizen to the General Government, Is
i cept in the advocacy of downright Federal
j ism and hat we have fought from th
I dauningof our political existence up to ii
]. present moment Of our life; and by the bel
! Hof God NE ever intend 70 pursue It an
6 pierce i through, whatever gaudy guise
i may assume We have seen L u high pls
s ees dressedin the glittering habiiiments I
necessity and Hself- preservation. Sue
a.ns