The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-04-02

known as a State Rights Democrat. This was
when the term State Rights was intended by
those who approvingly used il, to include the
idea Of State remedies also.
Thus Mr. Livingston, who, in the great de-
bate in the United States Senate of 1880, took
the middle ground between notification on the
one hand and consolidation on the other, said :
But if The power contcnded for on the one side
be dangerous, the doctrine by which it is op
posed on the other seems o less so. Ii this be
strictly popular government, as commended for
by the Senator from Massachusetts, (Mr. Web
ster,) that is to say, government formed by the
people Of the United States, considered in one
mass, without any consideration of the relation
in which they stand to each other as citizens Of
different States, then the following important
consequences follow: not denial of State
Rights. But, sir, although
his argument acknowle edges the existence of our
reserved rights, yet il took away the means of
preserving them" Thi, is the speech which
was published in the Washington Globe of Sept.
81, 1888, in aid Of an exposition Of the prnci-
Piles of President Jaekson's proclamation of
1892
Mr.. Grundy, of Tennessee, whose claim to
the appellaton OF Democrat, cannot, suppose,
be denied, in the same debate after having op-
posed the doctrine that State legislature could
nulify and make void an act of Congress, and
having referred TO the manner in which the Con
stitution was adopted, said Let the injured
and oppressed State, then, assume its highest
political attitudes convention in the State, for
the purpose OF deciding whether the great fun
damental law, which unites ard binds the States
together, has been violated
1t the State possesses the power to act as
have shown, the necessary consequence is, that
the act of Congress must cease to operate in
the State; and Congress must acu uicsce, by
abandoning the power, or obtain an express
grant from the great source from which all it's
powers are drawn. The general government
would have no right to use force & =
What can be more rational? What more con-
sisteEt with the spirit of our system, than where
there is n conflict between a sovereign State Ia
party to the compacD and the general govern
ment, as the powers which have been yielded to
the latter, that it should be compelled to decide
the question by an appeal to the source of all
its powers! | do not hesitate to say that the
power on the part of the States to compel such
an appeal is indispensable to the existence of
their sovereignty, and to the preservation of
their reserved rights.
If three-fourths of the States shall not con-
cur in admitting the contested power, or shall
not pronounce that it already exists, Congress
will be constrained to abandon the exercise of
1t, inasmuch as no new power can be granted
without such concurrence. The decision of
less number ought not to be obligatory, when
State has solemnly pronounced that such grant
Of authority was never made" This doctrine
that the ultimate arbter between the States and
the federal government was convention of the
deputies of the people of the Union, Mr..
Grundy claimed, as an "humble disciple of an
old school," to draw from Mr. Jefferson, who
said " 1t has been the peculiar wisdom and fe-
Lefty OF our Constitution to have provided this
peaceable appeal, when that of other nations
Is at once to force" But why multiply proof
that the Democratic is the State Rights party
Tie must be ignorant indeed Of the political his
tory of our country, who has yet to learn that
fact. Heirs of the principles of the old Repub-
lean party, we also inherited their hostility to an
extension of federal power by construction
This. is " State Rights" This, like,an impassa-
BILE wall, has kept our people divided into two
political parties, from the foundation of the gov
eminent, up to the present hour; and this is
now, as it has been, the vital principle of the
Democracy of the United States. 1t was, then,
no change of principle or of name, to designate
the Democracy of the Democratic State Rights
party.
On what, then, did Gov. Foote rely, when he
said assuredy was not nominated by the true
Democracy of the State for the office of gov
ernor;" but which he said he would "not stop
here TO SHOVE" He acted with his usual cum
ming in this. Had he stopped there until he did
show it, he never would have progressed farther.
TO say that was nominated "only by little
squad of avowed secessionists," was to utter a
great even for him. Here it is known
hat /
committee but by Democrats and Democratic
presses in every section of tho State and that
the committee to fill vacancies in the Democrat
ic ticket, announced to the public, that when
they met they found that a nomination had been
made, and that it only remained for them to
ratify it. OF the impotent reflection which he
casts upon those gentlemen, will only say, ]
am sure there is not one of them who would
not, and ought not to feel himself humbled by
being placed in any moral sense on an equality
with him. But if was not the nominee Of the
true Democracy" who was <! Was he And
was it to be found in the convention which nomi-
mated him-a large majority of the delegates TO
which were Wings; one Of whom, a dstn.
guished man in his party, wittily objected to
taking the "foot of one party to make it the
head of another!" Few if any among us can
believe that that convention selected its candi-
date for governor because of their devotion to
Democratic principles" Does any one doubt
that it was done for the purpose of disiracting
and dividing the Democracy The distinguish.
ed and honorable members of the Wing party
who controlled that convention, am sure, will
not claim to haYMrepresented the true Democra
cy of Mississippi; and when they revert to the
history of that question by which the Democra.
cy was divided and their victory achieved, do
not doubt they must blush to possess
"The spoils from such foul foray borne
He brings forward extracts from Wing papers
which never supported me, to show my position
in lS4s, and quotes the Mississippian, for which
am no more responsible than for any other
paper to which | give a general approval, and
presents them as conclusive evidence because
he says he has never heard of my having con
tradicted the reports, as he terms the meagre
sketches Of the Wing papers, nor of my having
{ denounced" an editorial paragraph which he |
says was contained in the Mississippian.
will follow his example but half way, and
present a few modern extracts from papers
which have recently rendered him efficient sup
port