The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1860-01-12

eminent having all power and Government
having the right to take what power it pleases'
"Mr. Clerk, free Governments, so far AS their
protecting power is concerned, are made for
minorities, and the Jefersonian State Rights
theory protects minorites."
This is all very well as far as it goes, and is
entirely inconsistent with the position occupied
by the Democratic party. But Mr.. Curry should
have gone further. He has only asserted the
Jeffersonian doctrine as it regards the States.
Mr.. Jefferson and his friends had great deal
more to say in favor of the independent rights
of Congress and the Executive, as against the
Supreme Court, than upon the relative powers
of the States and Federal Governments. The
position which be most strenuously urged was
the equality of the three branches of the Fed
eral Government the Executive, Legislative,
and Judicial. These departments he declared to
be coordinate, and independent of each other.
He insisted that each was authorized by the
Constitution to judge Of the extent of its powers,
and that all were responsible to the States and
to the people for their sction.
q Mr.. Curry is a chamsion of States Rights, and
yet he arraigns Northern States for the asser-
ton of those rights. The fugitive slave act is
held to be unconstitutional, in whole or in part
by the majority of the Northern people; and
two or three of the Northern States, acting upon
the States Rights doctrine, have nuliied some
features of that act One would suppose that
this circumstance ought at least to command
the respect of Southern friend Of State soyer-
ereignty. 1t certainly indicates the prevalence
of Mr.. Jeffersons and Mr.. Calhoun's constitu-
tional theories in those Northern ATTITUDES, and
furnishes to all sectionsa guaranty against con-
solidation. If the particular law which has
aroused the Northern people to fall back upon
the reserved rights of the States happens to be
a favorite measure on the south side of Mason
and Dixon's line, Mr.. Curry should remember
that the North was equally dissatisfied with the
application which South Carolina made, and
the whole South threatened to make, of the
States Rights theory twenty-five years ago. Each
State must judge for itself as to the duty and
necessity of resistance to Federal tyranny and
for States Rights man 70 arraign State for
acting upon his own iavorite theory is the
height of absurdity and inconsistency 1t is
not for Mr.. Curry nor for us to say that Yer
mont or Wisconsin must submit to what they
regard an unconstitutional act of Congress I'M
til we get ready to pronounce it unconstitution.
al. Such a condition saps the theory in its
very foundation, and resolves it into simple
right of revolution.
While we subscribe to the theory of States
Rights, as laid down by Mr.. Jefferson, and
would justify State in multiplying or resisting
clearly unconstitutional law, we would not be
understood as sanctioning the position taken by
Mr. Curry, and by large number of his politi-
cal friends, that the triumph of particular PAR
ty in Presidential election would warrant re-
sistance. Such doctrine is utterly inconsist.
ent with the existence Of regular government );
and facted upon, it womb resolve society into
state of anarchy. To Justify State in resist
ing the Federal Government, there must be a
clear case of usurpation. But, so long as no
such usurpation is even alleged, which is the
case supposed, of resisting the Inauguration of
regularly-elected President, resistance on the
part of States, or of citizens, becomes treason,
and would be dealt with accordingly. In such
cause, the State could 9ot bind its citizens,
for citizens are bound IN allegiance to the
Federal as we'll as the Sts;te Government; and
the Federal Constitutions, +" and laws made in
pursuance thereof" are declared 10 be para
mount. So long, thereflre, as the respective
Governments keep within their spheres, the
citizen is bound to obey both and when a col
lision takes place, he is blund to obey that one,
whether Federal or Stat which keeps within
its constitutional duty.