Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1861-03-16

an inalenable right to alter, reform or abolish.
MIR. Chairman suppose it is unnecessary
to disclalm, on my part, any assent to what
has been usually termed the right Of peaceablc
secession or the right of constitutional seccs-
sion have always, since | have first heard
Of rights OF that sort contended for, been ut
terly unable even to comprehend the meaning
of the idea that the Constitution of Govern.
mcnt provided for constitutional mode of
breaking up finally the government, or that
an association Of States would allow
the right to one State, at whatsoever risks to
the interests Of Others by its own voluntary
act to disrupt the government, and to do that
without restoring to the other parties to the
compact, the right TO take their redress for in
jury done them, is principle Uncomfortable to
my mind. Yet will undertake to say that it
is only by confounding tho great principle
affirmed in this book, with their ideas of con.
stitutional or peaceable secession, that any OBJ.
lection by any gentleman can be entertained
10 the proposition as there stated. 1t is, as
have said before, but simple enumeration of
the right declared in the Declaration of indie
pendence, and the Bill Of Rights of Virginia
OF people to reform or alter as people their
form of government without being rebels, trail
tors or insurrectionists in that act.
| Well now, sir, as to the necessity, the pro-
priety OF making this declaration; that necessity
will be seen from the latter part of the very
clause to which have been referring.
The people of Virginia recognize the Ameri-
can principle that government is founded in
the consent Of the governed, and they concedc
the right CT the people Of the several States Of
this Union, for just causes, to withdraw from
their association under the Federal Government
with tn, people Of the other States, and TO erect
new Governments for their better security, and
they will never consent that the Federal power,
which is in part their power, shall be cXcrtcd
for the purpose of subjugating the people Of
such States TO the Federal authority.
| The necessary corollary from this PROPOSE.
ton, if maintained, as to the right of the peo-
Pile Of State to withdraw themselves from the
Federal authority, is, that these Federal au-
| thortics have no right, legally or constitution
ally, to deal with the question; and it is in.
tcnded-and not only in this, but in various
resolutions in this report, the position is as
sumed-it is intended to deny, utterly and ab-
solutcly, to the constituted authorities Of the
Federal Government ut Washington, the right
in any way, peaceably or (orcibly, to ad-
just the question Of the withdrawal Of any
State or States from the Union. Il un
derlies this whole protest proposed to be
made by Virginia against any attempt 1T
subjugaton or coer cion. ltuakes this aflrmu-
ton upon the basis, not Of fear, not OF cXpe
diency, but Of absolute denial of the right Of
these Government authorities to attempt in
any way to decide in regard to the secession
or withdrawal Of these States. 1t regards
such an attempt as Il usurpation Of authority
not granted them by the Constitution. We
! cnp rn1a DIV trnI,l1 r0Dpa(l. |
bend, that the ether parties to this compact,
which is broken by the withdrawal Of some
StsteS, have perfect right to Judge for them
selves as to the proprlety and justice OF the
cause which has induced those States TO with
draw, and to the extent that they arc injured,
to take redress from the former parties i'll the
Federal Government. But we deny totally tn
the authorities OF the Federal Government, as
mere agency, with limited powers, locking
only 10 the conduct Of the Government in its
fullness and entirety, in . state Of peace, the
power in any way to deal with this question.
Sir, it is q remarkable fact, that the present
Federal Executive, Mr.. Lincoln, while he de-
MOS the power 10 deal with this subject peace
ably-while he denies that he has any right 10
| recognize the secession or withdrawal Of these
Statcs-hnlds that he has the right to deal with
them forcibly. suppose it could be scarcely
denied, If every other State in this Union ex-
cept the Southern Cvnfcdcrated States was
perfectly willing to consent to their separation,
that it would be competent to do SO, and that
no war, no collision would necessarily result in
this state Of things. presume if one State Of
this Union, at any period Of her history, had
proposed TO the other States Of the Union that
it might peaccably withdraw from the Federal
| Union and the other States had unanimously
aSsented to that proposition, that that with
drawal might hc made peaceably, without any
danger, without any possibility Of collision.
And yet, according to the position Of Mr.. Lin.
coin, he has no right to consent to the with
drawal Of these States, but he is forced to the
only other alternative: that Of their Subjuga-
ton. He admits that he has no power in the one
aspect-that of assent to peaceable separation
to deal at all with the question; while he under
! takes, from sense Of duty, as he says, to de-
eide it in the other aspect, ard say that he is
bound by his oath to execute the laws OF the
United States over the seeded States. Why,
sir, this alone would present the question in a
most extraordinary point Of view The federal
authority might thus make war, but without
the right to make peace.
But sir, when you come to look into the
Constitution of tho United States it is most OBJ
vious it never was in the contemplation OF the
trainers of that instrument that under existing
circumstances any law Of the United States,
Of any kind or description, could be executed
within the limits Of the State where the civil
authorities had been overthrown. Is there
any right on the part Of the federal execu-
tive to use military force except upon the
call of the civil authorities local civil
authorize that force to DC used in
subordination TO the civil authorities? The
| Constitution itself provides that the authorl-
ties Of the State, its Legislature, II in SEES
sion, or the Governor ifthe Legislature is not in
session alone shall call upon the Federal Govern
nent even for the purpose of putting down do
lnestc instruction. The President Of the Uni
ted States has no original authority in any way
to use any military force within the limits OF
State under any circumstance; but it has been
supposed by him that whilst he could not exc
cute this authority directly, or would not as
he said, use ithmmedlately in the interior Of
State vet in the collection Of the revenue
along the coast, he might go on and execute
these laws-and you find bill before Con
gress, one of those bills called force bills, dc.
signed ngeniously in order to bring to bear
upon the people of the seeded States the Fed.
eral authority directly, under the prctence. OF
collecting the revenue. | allude to the Dill
called tho Cochrane bill The substance of it
was provision that in any part Of those States
where there was no collector, the President
should make proclamation Of that fact, and
vessels from abroad laden with dutable goods
going into that port, should be diverted from
their course by revenue cutters Of the United
States and compelled to make their entries in
other ports outside of those States. 1t will
be found, sir, that even in regard to that. that
that bill could not be put into operation with.
out direct and palpablc violation of one OF
the distinct provisions OF the Constitution Of
the Enited States ] refer TO 9th clause Of itc
section 9:
mo preference shall be given BY any rcgl.
Iation of commerce. or revenue to the ports OF