Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1861-01-27

ipT0p0gition,un the same dav wass
"And to render these prohibitions efsctual
the Legislature Of the United states shall have
the power to revise the laws Of the severa
states that mFy be supposed to iofriuge th'
powers exclusively delegated by Ibis Consli o.
lion TO Congress, and to negative and annu
such sdo.n
The proposition giving power to negative
the laws Of the several States, passed at FRS
huuiediy, without consideration; but upon
further examination, fan justice vas done {,
iit. Upon the subject Of force, Mr.. Madison
said, moving 10 postpone the proposition tC
authorize force
"Mr. Madison observed, that the more b,
reflected on Tie use Of force. the more b,
doubted the prscticabilitY, the justice and thI
Ell acy o 81, when applied 20 people collec-
itively, and net individually. A union Of th,
states containing such an ingredient, seemed
TO provide for is own destruction. The use o
force against 2 STATE would look more like a
declaration Of war than an infictiou of punish.
ment, and would probably be considered BY
the party attacked as a dissolution Of all pre-
vious compacts, by which it might be bound
Re hoped that snch system would be framed
az might render this resource unnecessary and
moved that The clause be STANDARDIZATION
Pdpers-DsbGtes in the Federal CoRUention, col.
3, p 40.
Mr.. Msiison, the ancestor Of cur own distin-
guished colleague from Virginia, said:
The most jarring elements of nature-f,s =
and water, themselves, are not more incompat-
ible than such mixture Of civil liberty and
military execution. VIII the militia march
from one State TO sDother 10 order to collect
The arrears Of taxes from the delinquent men,
bars Of the Republic? Win they maintain an
I srmy for this purpose? VIII not the citizens
o' the invaded States assist one another, tn
they rise aR cne man, an1 shake of the Union
I sliogether? Rebellion is The only case in
which The military force Of Q State can be
properly eXefted against its citizens. In one
point Of view, Re was struck with horror at
! the prospect OF recurring 70 this eXpedient.
/ To punish the non-payment Of taxes with
death was severity not yet adopted by das-
Potisn ilself; yet this uDeXsmpled cruelty
would be mtrcy compared TO a military col.
lection Of revenue, in which the bsyonet could
make no discrimination between the innocent
and the guilty. He took this occasion TO re-
( peat, that notwithstanding his solicitUds to
Z establish a national government, be never
I would agree to abolish the State governments.
I or render them absolutely insignificant They
! were as necessary as the General Government,
and be would b. equally careful TO preserve
them -Madis0n Pdpery-D Debates in the Fed
er7l Coarenti0n, Uol ., 2t7.
! Mr.. Ellsworth, upon the same subject, said !:
/ Offence, we see how necessary for the Union
3 is coercive principle. No man pretenns the
contrary; we al see and feel this necessity.
/ The only question is, shall it be a coercion OF
! law, OF a coercion cf arms? There is no other
possible alternative. Where will those who
I oppose a coercion Of law come out? Where
viii they end? A necessary consequences Of
! their principles is war OF The States, one
against the other. ! an for coercion by law,
/ the coercion that acts only upon delinquent
individuals This Constitution does not at
tempt 10 cOsTce sovereign bodies, S ates, in
4 their political capacity. No coercion is sp-
4 piicable to such bodies but that Of an armed
/ force. If we should attempt to execute the
( lave Of TIE Union by ssndisg an armed force
against delinquent State, it would involve
/ the g'rd and bad, the innocent and guilty, 10
/ the same calamity. ."-EiliOt's Debaies, rel. ?,
1 p. 1877.
Alexander Hamilton said:
I "It has been observed, to coerce the States
( is one Of the maddest projects that was ever
devised. A failure Of compliance will never
be confined to a single State. This being the
case, can We suppose il wise TO hazard a civil
war? Suppose Massachusetts, or any large
S ate, shout refuse, and Congress should at
tempt TO compel them, woUld they not have in
husnce 60 procure assistance, especially from
those States which are in The same situation
as themgeiuea2 What picture does this idea
present 20 our view? A complying State at
hdE WIN Don COM plhthZ oldte; congress
marching the troops Of one State into the
bosom Of another; this State collecting auxil-
iaTie'. and forming, perhaps, a majority against
ts Federal head. Here is nation at war
with itself. Can any reasonable man be well
disposed toward a government which makes
war and carnsE Es the Oaly means Of supporting
itself government that can exist only By
the sword2 Every such war must involve the
innocent with the guilty. This single c0nsid-
4 b. .r- g.
peaceab.e citizen against such a go7eTnmsn5.
El'i0it's Debates, UOl. 2, p. 233.
But, sir. strong as these gentlemen were
against giving the power to exert armed force
against the States, som Of the bes. and sblest
men Ct the convention were in favor Of giving
Congress control over Stale &C ion BY mega
tive. Mr.. Madison himself was strongly in
/ favor Of that; and IL that power had been
granted, ths iirst Of personal liberty bills that
were p8gssd would have been the last, for
Congress would at once have annulled it, and
the other States wogld have taken warning BY
that example Mr. piucknev's proposition
was brought up, that ''ths national legislature
should have authority 10 negative ali laws
which hey should irige to be i'm proper.O He
urged it strongly. Mr.. Madison said;
"a negative was the mildest expedient that
could be devised for preventing these mischiefs
/ TIE exercise OF such q cheek would prevent
attempts to commit them. Should no such pre-
caution Be eHErafted, he only remedy would
I be 10 appeal to coercion. Was such a remedy
/ eligible? Was it practicable Could the na-
/ tionsl resources, il e1eTted to the utmost, en-
] force a national decree against Massachusetts
sbetted, perhaps, by some Of her neighbors2
I II would not be possible. A small proportion
Z Of the community, in q compact situation, act-
/ ing on The defensive, and at one Of its extrem-
/ tiles, might at any tine bid defiance to The ma
tonal authority. Any government for the
I United States, formed on the supposed practi-
cabil'y Of using force against the unconsti-
tulonai Proceedings ofthe Sta es, would prove
as visionary and fsllaeious as the government
/ Of Congress. 7-D Ds5zies Of c0nUen.ion, Madison
paTer5, col. 8, Pill
That JIG, Of the Congress OF The Confe3era-
ton Wen, sir, Mr.. Butler said to that, he
was "vehement against the negative In the
proposed extent a cutting off all hope Of equal
Justice 20 the distant States. The people there
wonld not, he was sure, give it = hearing;"
and on the vote, Mr.. Madison, aided BY Mr.
Pinckney, got but three States for It, and Of
these three States one was Virginia, and be
gol Virginia only BY vote o. three to two,
I General Washington, in The chair, not voting.
The proposition, therefore, was directly put
down, but It was not killed forever. On the
18th Of Juig It was renewed, and Mr.. Madi-
son again urged the convention to give some
power 70 the Fsteral Government over State
action
" Mr. Madison considered the negative on
The laws Of the States as essential to the eff
cacy and security Of The General Government.
The necessity Of General Government pro-
ceeds from The propensity Of The States 10 pur-
sue their particular interests, in opposition to
the general interest This propensity will
continue 70 disturb the system unless efFsctu-
ally controlled. Nothing short OF a negative
on their laws viii control it. They win pass
laws which viii accomplish their luxurious
objects before they can be repealed by the
general legislature, or set aside by the na'ional
tribunals. "a p.Wer Of negatiying
the improper laws Of the States is Il once the
most mila and certain mears Of preserving the
harmony Of the system. Is utility is suff-
cienty displayed in The British systsm,o etc
This was again DegatiVed in Juy by the
same vote. Finally, on the 23l Of August, for
the last time, an attempt was made TO give that
nega1ge with check upon it; and it vas in
these wards:
" Mr.. Charles Pincbney moved 10 add, az IN
additional power to be invested in the Legis-
lsture of the United States:
90 To negative all laws passed bv the several
States Interfering, in the opinion Of the Leg
isi iature, 'sith ne general interests aud bar
mony OF TIE Union, provided that two-thirJs
of the members Of each hsuse assent to the
ssme.n
Mr.. Madison wanted it committed. Mr..
Rutledge said:
" II nothing else, this alone would damn, and
ought to daHn, the Cons tuition. WIN any
State ever agree 10 be bound hand and foot in
this manner? It is verse than making mere
corporations Of them, whose hy-laws would
not be subject to this shackie."
And thereupon Mr. Pincknsv Withdrew bis
proposition, and an control was abandoned.
There was then % be no control on the part Of
be General Government over State legisa-
tioni Otherwise than in the acliou ns the Fed
eral Judiciary upon such pecanisrV contre-
veFsies as might be properly brought before
them.
Notwithstanding an this jealousy, when this
Consti ulion car 20 be discussed in the con
ventions Of the States, it met formidable op-
position, upon the ground that the States were
not sufficiently secure. TIE advocstes by every
possible means en3esvored 10 quiet the alsrms
Of the Friends Of state rights. Mr. Madison,
10 Virginia, againet Patrick Henry: hIr. Ham
iitqn and Chief Justice jay, in New York,
against The opponents there in all the States,
eminent men used every exertion 10 their power
to induce the adoption Of tue Constitution
They failed, until they proposed to accompany
their Tatiications win amendments that should
prevent los meaning from being perverted, aBd
prevent D. from being falsely construed and in