Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1861-01-08

laws of the individual States to the
contrary notwithstanding; and that, if
any State OF any body of men in any
State, shnll oppose or prevent the cn rying
into execution such acts or treaties. the
Federal Executive shall be authorized to
call forth the power of the coufederated
States, or so much thereof as may be ue-
ceSsury to enforce and compel an oLedi-
ence to such acts, Or an observance of such
treaties.''
Now, while Mason, Madison and Hamil-
ton, as the debates show, deprecated the
exercise of actual military force against
State, as an existing community or corpo-
ration, it was ingeniously provided, by
making the Constitution itself the funda-
mental and supreme law of each State,
that it should operate upon each individual
citizen, primarily, and in so far as powers
were delegated in it to the exclusion of
his local constitution. In this way the
trainers of the Constitution avoided the
disasters which were contemplated This
view OF the subject is admirably explained
by Edmund Randolph, in letter adj
dressed to the Speaker of the House of
Delegates of Virginia, which will be found
in Elliott's Debates, 4s4. He says:
"But although coercion is an indfspen-
sible ingredient it Onght not to be directed
atrainst n State ne a State IF heirr, in,r,,,s--
sibIe to attempt IL exccpt nv bIGcL.,din,,
the trnde oF the deIinnuent n, c,rry,inss
war into its bowels. Let US not bring
these things into jeopardy. Let us rather
substitute the same process by which ind-
vidu0ls are compelled to contribute to the
government of their own States. Instead
Of making reguisitioRs to the Legislatures. it
would Hnne1r more nronpr tint tnYos
should be imposed by4tbe Federal han5
under due notifications and guards tbnt
the collectors should demand from rho
citizens their respective nuoIas md ho
summarized as in the collection of oT,Iinsry
taxes"
Orr noint will ba stilI further oxen,,1i-
fed by Charles Pirkens nf Sorth C1rnIin.,
who in the ratification Crnvcntion in fh,t
Stale. eyplaineJ ms u member of tbe Eel
craI C;onvention the nrin,inIos mo-, ,,hi,.I,
the Constitution vas fnnr5od Va,
Elliott 255.
He saws "thoupb the Confederation
might possess the great outlines of - or.n.
er3l government. vet il was in fact no,6ino
more rhan FEDERAL nninn or str;,.,i5,
apeakfng league founded on unternoI md
persunsiye uriHrinles ,r;Jb notb;,,, ,,.,.,,,,
hent and cosrciss in IL, Can,l;tyi;o1 where
the members might or might not comply
with their federal engagements rs they
thought proper. The convention saw and
felt the necessity Of establishing a govera-
meat upon different principle, which, in
stead of requiring The Intervention of
thirteen different legislatures between the
deuand and the compliance, should oper-
ate upon The PeoPic, in tllc first instance
Stale governments viii naturally slide into
opposition of the general one. and be cast
ly induced to consider themselves as ri
walls. They 'rii, after a time, resist tie COL
lection Of a rercnue, aud il the general gov
ernment is obliged to concGde, i'll the
smallest degree on this point, they will, of
course, neglect their duties aud despise its
Part of this has now become
prophecy; but there is still more Singh
lar declaration from this gentleman, now
in the very process of fulfllmcnt. "We
are so weak that by ourselves the SoutIp-
ern StNtes could not form union strong
enough for the purpose of eifectually pro-
fecting each other. Without Union wiih tie
otter States, South Carolina must soon fall.
Is there any one among us so much Quix-
ote as to suppose that this State could
long muintain her independence, il she
stood alone, or was only connected with
the Southern States?
Last of all, we lave ouite ns SINGULAR n
declaration from another son of South
Carolina, Charles Cotswortb Pinknev. an
other member of the Convention. Hssays;
"The separate independence and indi.
vidnal sovereignty of the several States
were never thought of by the enlightened
band of patriots who formed the Declara-
tiou of Independence. The several States
not even mentioned by name in any part of
it; rs if it was intended to impress this
maxim on America, that our freedom and
arose from our Union, and
that without it we would be neither free
nor independent Let US, then, consider
all attempts to weaken this Union, by
maintaining that each State is separately
anu individually independent. as species of
political heresy. which can Hersr benefit
us, but may bring on us the most serious
distress.