The daily union., 1852-01-11


The right OF the people OF single State 10 absoye
themselves at WILL and without the consent of the other
States, from their most solemn obligations and hazard
the liberties and happiness OF the millions composing this
Union. cannot be acknowledged. Such authority be-
lieved 10 be utterly repugnani both TO the principles
upon which the general government is constituted. and
10 the objects which twas expressly formed 10 attain
Against all acts which may be alegedl 10 transcend
the constitutional power OF the government, or which
may be announcement or oppressive in their operation the
constitution itself has prescribed the modes OF redress
II is the acknowledged attribute OF free institutions, that
under them the empire OF and law is substituted
for that of the sword To other source appeals
for supposed wrongs be made consistently with the ob
cations OF South Carolina To other such appeals
be made with safety at any time and to their decisions
when consiuionaily pronounced i becomes the duty
no less OF the public authorities than OF the people in
every case TO yield patriotic submission.
That State any other great portion of the people
suffering under long and ntoerabe oppression. and hav
ing tried all constitutional remedies without the hope OF
redress, may have natural right, when their happiness
be otherwise secured and when they can do so
without greater injury 10 others, TO absove themselves
from their obligations to the government and appeal
the last resort. need not the present occasion be
denied. pp
g The existence OF this right, however must depend up
on the causes which may justify its exercise II is the m
9 rafo which presupposes that the proper appeals to all
other redress have been made good faith, and
which can never berghtiuy resored to unless i be un-
avoidabe It'll not the right OF The State but oil the in
dvdual, and OF all the individuals in the State Ii is the
right of mankind generally to secure, by all in
their power the blessings Of liberty and happiness; but
when, or these purposes any body OF men have youn
tarily associated themselves under particular form OF
government no portion OF them dissolve the associa
uon without acknowledging the correative right in The
remainder decide whether that dissolution be per
mitted consistently with The general happiness In this
view, il is right dependent upon the power 10 en-
force IT,"
OF General Jackson in his celebrated proclamation and
nullihcaon message, BY suggesting that that proclama
UP oy M and IN ~
came iedeast Now this statement Of the senator from
South Carolina Mr. RHETrl in regard 10 this matter is
full OF and anachronsns He said that Mr. Jefer
son wrote Mr. Livingston letter in approval OF his
speech upon Foors resolution. But that could not be
70, as Mr. Jefferson was dead four years before that
speech in 1890, and Mr. Jefferson died in 1896 Mr. JEFF
ferson did write him letter in 1884, in relation to his
speech upon the subject Of internal improvements And
ne did not then approve OF his opinion but on the con-
tary, he disaDproved Of IT,
But the gentleman has committed still greater in
alleging that at one time of his life Mr. Livingston was
federast, who favored the giving the strongest
powers TO the government OF the United States.
But Mr. President, the charge is made in order to les
sen the weight OF the proclamation that Mr. Livingston
was the author Of it. But that matter has been fully
planned that will not now enter into II at any length
has been fully explained by one who was the private
secretary OF General Jackson at the tme and shall
merely attempt to show how utterly erroneous was the
idea that General jackson would allow any other person
10 dicate for him anything OF that kind II is great
mistake to suppose that General Jackson drew his ideas
from other men. No doubt he had able cabinet at
that time, and no doubt Mr.. Livingston was prominent
member OF IT, General Jackson consulted with other
men, and they may have induced him 10 make altera
ons; but the character OF The work is preeminently
his own.
To show how little foundation there is for the charge
that Mr.. Livingston ncucated the federal doctrines Of
Alexander Hamilton, | will refer you to his cele-
brated speech Mr.. Foofs resolutions Ii was well
that the gentleman tried to get clear OF his authority for
it was powerful authority agans, hipa 1t neces.
a sf s neaeasS Shfhe he 20 Eli and pure
pies OF Sate-rights democracy. Mr.. Livingston made
upon those resolutions most eloquent speech in which
he differed from Mr.. Webster Mr. Hayne, Judge Rowan,
and others. The only person with whom he did
agree, in that debate, was gentleman who regret is
now more, but then distinguished member OF the
Senate-Judge Woodbury. And he never, 10 the end of
his life, retracted single idea in that great speech Yet
the gentleman says he federalis and inculcated
the principles OF Alexander Hamilton. Let me proceed to
read from that Speech in which there much wis
dom, 30 much eoquence and so much good doctrine:
al have given the subject the most anxious and
painful attention and differing, as ! have the misfor
tune to do, in greater or less degree from all the
tors who have preceded me, feel an obligation 10 give
my views on the subject.
My friend from New Hampshire IMr. WOODBURY. ]
OF whose luminous argument cannot speak too highly,
and TO the greatest part OF which agree, does coin
eide the assertion OF constitutional right OF prevent
ing the execution OF law believed to be unconstitu
tona but refers opposition to the inalienabe right OF
sistance TO oppression.
Gall these senator's consider the constitution as a COM
pact between the States in their sovereign capacity, and
Of them Mr. Rowan has conended that sovereignty
cannot be divided; from which it may be inferred that
no part OF the sovereign power has been transferred TO
the general government.
The arguments, on the sde 10 show that the con-
stituiion is the result OF compact between the States,
cannot, think be conrovered and those which go to
show that il is founded the consent OF the people, and,
IN one sense OF The word popular government are equal
ly incontrovetible.
Both OF the positions seemingly so contradictory are
uue and both OF them false-true respects one
feature IN the constutlon-erroneous IL applied TO the
whole"
:" But with all these proofs (and think them incon.
overble) that the government could have been brought
into being without compact, yet am far from admit.
ting that because this entered largely into lis origin,
therefore there characteristics OF another kind
which impress on intimate union and amalgam
ton OF the interests OF the citizens OF the different States
which give them the general character OF citizens OF
the united nation This single fact will show that the
entire sovereignty OF the States individually has been
retained The relation OF citizen and sovereign is recp-
rocal. To whatever power the citizen owes allegiance,
that power is his sovereign. There cannot be double
although there may be subordinate fealiy The gov
ernmen also for the most part except in the election OF
senator's representatives and President and some ohers
acts in the exercise OF lis legitimate powers directly upon
individuals and not through the medium OF State author
ties. This is essential character OF popular gov.
ernment
This government, then, is neither such federatiye
one founded on compact leaves 10 all the parties
fhen full soyeregnsy, such consolidated popular
government as depyes them of the whole OF that
eign power
AS to all these attributes OF sovereignty, which, BY
the federal compact iranerred 10 the general gov.
ernment that government is sovereign and supreme the
States have abandoned and never reclaim them AS
to all other sovereign powers, the States retain them
"What IS TO be done The right Of the State SAYS
the gentleman must be respected but unfortunately for
fhn aapf he ttfnf.a -