Newspaper Page Text
eloquent. 0 The minstrel approached the
window—she had not presence of mind, per
chance not inclination, to close ttie blinds,—
He took her hand and pressed it fervently to
his lips—she did not withdraw it, and the kiss
was repealed again and agun After a while
it was the unspoken language of lips—kissing
without asking.
Such is the power of music—Mhe divine
goddess alone inspired them; 'hey had neither
Feen nor heard each other utter a word. At
length the stricken damsel whispered softly:
“Ah, prithee, gentle stranger, discourse to
me thro’ your guitar. We are alone—father
and mother are wrapped in the arms of sleep
and you can sing ine into elysium.”
At thia moment a torrent of water came
fumbling from the ganet window upon the de
voted head of gentle troubadour, and a shrill
voice at the same time exclaimed—-
“Ben, you brack varmint ?If you come
here agin wid your banjo ’sturbin de neigh
bors, I’ll have something ’bout your scours
dat you won’t like so well, I tell.”
It is said that the romantic lady made a sud
den oetreat, not a little chagrined at finding
herself the rival of her house maid.
Bow Wow.— The Poughkeepsie Tele
graph relates that a few evenings since a per
son who is fend of a dram stepped upto tne
bar of a public house, and called for a glass of
brandy and water. Theie were two or three
persons in the room at the lime, one of whom,
Mr. Sutton, a ventriloquist of high reputation,
was engaged in reading newspapers at the ta
ble. The man took up the glass with an evi
dent mark of satisfaction, and was in the act
of potting it into his lips, when ‘how wow-wow,
appeared to come from a whiffet dog, as if in
the act of biting at his leg. The man kicked
and cried “get out” most lusiilv, in the same
moment in doing which, he sei down hig glass
and looked for the dog. But no dog was to
be seen, and this excited his surprise in an es
pecial manner. However he shortly conclud
ed to “go ahead” and take his dram, hut in the
act of a second tune lipping it to his lips,
“bow-wow-wow” barked the dog louder than
before, and snarled as if in earnest. The
man jumped aside, kicked again, and halloed
“get out,” evidently alarmed. He then look
ed about for the dog, but as none was to be
s«*en, he set down his glass, declaring he
would not drink under such circumstances,
and walked out. Mr. Sutton ought to be al
lowed a pension by the Temperance Society.
L<we and Matrimony.— We attended Mc-
Donald Clark’s lecture on these subjects, the
other evening, arid would not have been ab
sent for ten times the price of admission; it was
throughout thickly studded with truth and beau
ty. We have heard him called the mad poet;
this is idle—or if not, there is more “method
in his madm ss,” than in the conduct of thou
sands who are counted sane. We subjoin the
TOTmwinrr remarks of his relation to old bache
lors, as a proof of what we assert :
“ In the vast (lower field of hum in affec
tion, the old bachelor is ihe very scarecrow of
happiness, who drives away th? li’ile birds of
love, that come to steal the hemlock seeds of
loneliness and despair. Where is there a inorc
pitiable object in the world, than a man who
has no amiable woman interested in Ins wel
fare I How dismal docs his desolate room ap
pear when he cemes home at night, wet and
hungry, and finds a cold hear h or barren table
and a lonely pillow, that looks like the white
urn of every earthly enjoyment ! See the sick
old bachelor in the dark afternoon of life, when
his heart is sinking to its sundown ! Not a
solitary siar of memory gleams over the dusk
of his opening grave—no weeping wife to bend
like a blessing over his dying bed, no fond
daughter to draw his chilly hand into the soft
pressure of hers, and warm his icing blood,
with the revning furs of (infilling affection,
no manly boy to link his breathing name with
ihe golden chain of honorable society, and
bind his history in the vast volume of the wot Id
he is leaving forever. He has eat —drunk—
and died—and earth is glad she has got rid of
bun; for he has d* nr little else, but crump his
soul into the Circumtercnce of a sixpence, and
n<» human but his wasiiei woman will breathe a
mjh at his funeral.”
A widowed lady of our acquaintance whose
daughters were old enough to be sought after,
was holding forth in their presence and ours,
in a very edifying manner, upon the advanta
ges and comforts of a single life. “.A hus
band is by no means necessary,” said she, “to
•he regulation and support of a family. I man
mine, tor example, as well ns a husband
could do.” We sat silent, knowing tho art
of management which our female friend pos
sessed; and wo accordingly looked across the
bre place tn see how the argument operated
with the younger friends, for whose special bo
, hoof we were sure it hid been in ide. “ M .rna
F may be ri’ht and I dire say that she is,” said
one young lady; ** we sec hi her t.ow well a
J.idy imy manage and main am a family with
out a husband; but it appear* to me a nusband
would be necessary in getting a family to
gether.”
AicA* Aames.— The Illinois Pioneer give,
•he following list of nn’k nam ad .pt- d• •
distinguish the ciliz ns <«t the '.Vr-.iem S at***
In Kentucky tbev are called Corn tn.a
era.
Ohio . • Buck* yes,
Indiana - . Hoosiers,
Illinois - - Sui kers,
Mis souri . . Pukes,
Michigan r. . WiKihertnea,
T«» yankees are called Eels.
In a case of assault and battery, where
•tone had been throw n bv the defend «i»t,
following valuable evidence was drawn u .t
u Y >rksiure man:
“Did you sec tho defendant threw .
a’.jEsi”
“I saw a stone, and Pze pretty sure defend
ant t tiro wed it.”
“Was it a large ston< •?”
“1 should say it wur a ’argish stone.”
“What was ns size?”
“I should say a sizable stone.”
“Can’t you answer definitely how big i
was?”
“I should say it were a stone of some big
ness.”
“Can’t yon compare it to some other ob
ject?”
“ Why, if I wur to comoire it, so as to give '
s >me noti >n of the stone, I should say it wer<
as large as a lump of chalk.”
From the Standard of Union.
Did Georgia Nullify in 1826 and 7. As'
we have shewn, there was no session of Con
gress from the div 'he Treitv of the Indian
Springs was ratified, until tin* first Monday, it
being the 4th div of December thereafter—
That there was during that year, an angrv cor
respondence between the Governor of Geor
gia and the officers of the General Govern
ment, is well remembered, growing out of the
opposition to the fulfillment of the Treaty by
the Indians, the death of Mclntosh, and the
special agency of Gaines and Andrews. Thus
Matters stood it the meeting of Congress, in
December, 1825. At the commencement of
that session the controversy arising out of all
these circumstances, constituted one of the
subjects of most anxious solicit de—\ dele
gation from the Creek nanon repaired to
Washington City, at the opening of that ses
sion, which was met by a delegation of the
Mclntosh Indians. It is not out purpose in
offering th'S exposition, to pdli.ite or justify
the course pursued by Mr. Adams’ adminis
tration in regard to the subject —Ta it co irse
has already received our unqualified condem
nation. ;
We are dealing with the Georgia aspect of
the question for the purpose of answering the
interrogatory at the head of this communica
tion. Whether from obstinacy, or from what
other cause, it is not now necessary to enquire;
it had been manifest from the date of the Se
cretary’s order ><> the commissioners in May
1825, to pay over the $200,000 to General
Gaines, th it it was not the intention of Mr.
\datns to abide by the treaty of the Indian
Springs. Shortly after the meeting of Con
gress tn December. 1825, Mi. Adams set
about making a ne v arrangement with the In
dians, for the lands ceded by that treaty. The
result was the formation of a treaty with the
Creek delegation on the 24ih of January, 1826,
winch was communicated to trie Senate of the
United St ites for ratification on the 31 st of .•
same month. Tins treaty was ref'rixd »i
the same day to the Committee of Indian af
fairs, of winch Col. Benton, of Missouri was
chairman, and on the 17<h of March following
that r-nrn mu wrt. .d -Adlww rtrg irsotu-
tions :
“ Resolved. That the Senate do not advise
and consent to the ratification of the treaty,
made at Washington on the 24'h of January,
1826, between the Secretary of War, <m the
part of the United States, and the chiefs and
headmen of tho Creek Nation, on the part of
said nation.”
Although the reason'-' on which this resolu
tion was b tsed, are not stated in the executive
proceedings of the Senate, it was understood
at the lime, and ever smee, that the commit
tee proposed till' rejection of >he treat' , be
cause it did not etn >race ail the lands then oc
cupied by tho Creek I idians within 'he limits
ol Georgia. In consequence of <he forrt’om ’
resolution, and the fact just mentioned, the
Creek delegation was indu ed to agree ■<> an
additional article which was com hided on the
31-t of AI iron, 1826, winch was supposed bv
many, to embrace all tlm lands included in the
treaty of me 12th of February, 1825. The
ireity of the 2 lili ofj muarv, and the addition
al article of the 31st March, wis ratified by
the Senate on the 21st of April, 1526. In all
tliest transactions, it was well understood at
the time, that Col. Benton exercised his pow
erful influence to induce the Indians to make
an arrangement which would satisfy all the
chums of Georgia And it is believed that the
impression on his mind was, that a || (bn hud
claimed by her was included, m f ac t, t s nO i m
brins, bi lo* addition d article .>f the 31st of
Match, 1826- Not much ttm nad elapsed
after it e conclusion of me 'oregomg anan.’n
ments, before it was ascertained, mat all the
( reek lands within the limits ol (>. orgia,
were not included, and the final adjustment
seems to have been placed, bv the officers of
the General Government, upon the ascertain
ment of the bound try between the states of
Georgia and Alabama—a matter which should
not have been suffered to mingle with the sub
ject, and which hit no necess-irv connection
wi h the q .estton now .n d r consideration.
la l oughout the year 18-6, ’h<« panics main
t anted 11. e -talus quo, I >emgi, iusi-.iing <m me
enlorcement ut the t.eaty of 1825, .ml \lt.
Glams lusts.i.<g that ihd treaty wis tmpeise
<ted by the arra .g»'m»*n c died the new treaty,
w iid), with its addili m d article, wis i a ified
•v the Senate on t: < 21-t of April. 1826. On
29 11 <>l January. 1827. too Se rotary of War
.d !res-ed a cmnm >m an mn, t | ie Governor
»t Georgia win i» wk ms vered by tile defi
m* e so well remembered, and on which d fi
rn i , i t» >s been attempted to set up he doe
rs le o! nullifi .tio , as the d » < f ne „f Hl ,.
• ernment of Georgia m 1825,6, and 7- Bv
i short Hid imp irti >. ex iu> 11 ton ot tin? c<»r
..spondeuce tiet veen the Secretary of Gar
id Goverum Troup, . .J the letter of th' 1 It -
*' i > he members ot Cougresa from Georgia,
i I >t:er referring to certain instructions
• ch h id oeen g.ven by the Secretary of War
he Viren agent, u wdl be seen that G'»ve-
• Troup did not place the resistance of Gen.
nullification, and that s«» ft
n mKing Hie ground of u>dh i< a'mn. he ac
"> ed in th new r .ty, awd thr c ntro.er-
j w<Xa closed by the tre ity concluded ry Tho.
L. MrKenny and John Crowell, with the
hiefs and headmen of the f’reek nation, a
he agency on the 15 h of November. 1827
V'd the article concluded by Crowell on th’’
3d of December, and ratified by the Senate of
he United States on the 26th of February
•’at ion, of all the rßmnant of their lands within
he Stale of Georgia.” Ina letter written bv
Governor Troup to the Secretary of War on
the 26’h nf January, 1827, he savs :
“ I can not sufficiently express mV regret
that I should on anv occasion, however, inno
cently have misunderstood or misrepresented
you—on the one to which von have referred
in your last communication I was particular tn
avoid if—it gives me much more pleasure I
assure von. to refer it to an ohttiseness of in
tellect, than to anv obscurity in the language
you employed. I did think mvself justifiable
by that language to conclude that it was lh“
intention of the President tn acquire by the
instrument called the new ’Teatv all the
lands within the Creek limits claimed by Geor
gia. and it was the more gratifying to me, to
come to this conclusion, because an opportu
nity presented of placing the President before
the people of in a favorable light in
relation to a of deep concernment to
them, on which they had felt sorely aggreved
and wounded, and felt so because of their be
lief, correct! vor incorrectly founded, that if
there had been intention to do right, right
would have been done” Jyc. The whole ten
or of this letter shews Governor Troup’s a•-
quiescence in ’he new treaty, and is filled with
reasons why the whol ■of th- land claimed bv
Georgia ought tn have been obtained by it.—
This point is sufficiently shewn by he forego
ing extract. In the same month, on the 31st
of January, 1827. the Secretary of War issued
an order to John Crowell, the Creek agent, o
which the following is an ex ract ;
“ I therefore enjoin it on ynu as a duty of
great importance, to adopt such mode as may
seem in your discretion to be best to obtain
their consent to relinquish their hold on these
pme barrens, which can be of no value to them,
and thus restore that state of quiet, which it is
so much the desire of the Executive to realize.
On ascertaining the views of the Chiefs, you
will communicate them to the Department;
and also at the same time the amount of the
consideration money, which they will be wil
ling to receive for (hose lands.” In reference
to the foregoing order of the Secretary, G >v
Troup addies-ed a letter to the Georgia dele
gation in Congress in the 21st February, 1827,
of which the following is a part :
“ Gentlemen—l was glad to learn by the
m fil to d iv, that measures hid been taken by
h President si’iseq to the comm mica
’i >i of the S- r-reiary " Wir of 'he 29th oh.
to pr ic.ire te lands im on: ay the ins rumen!
called the Nt w Treaty. I h ive nniform'y tir
ged this rne S tro. <> ifhe G a. ri 1 G>. era mem
C-...,, . m-»ni < press em wTTn'igTTess to
adopt it, and in no part ot rny correspondence
m »re strenuously, than tn my letter to the Se
cret uy of War, of the 26tu of J tnnarv”—The
letter from which the first quotation was made.
In the same letter, after referring to the then
recent menace of the President, and his defi
ance, Governor Troup says, “ so far as a de
termination was expressed to resort to the
civil process, it was decided to resort to the
like process, to sostaiM according to the con
stitution and laws of the United Stales, and the
constitution and laws of the State, the public
officers of Georgia engaged tn the execution
of their duties under the orders directly of its
Legislature and Executive authorities.*’ He
next proceeds to give his views of the proper
mode of settling doubtful questions of sove
reignty between a State and ’he United States,
and exprea-.es the opinion that negociation is
the proper mode. “ until a competent tribunal
shall lie assigned by the Constitution itself, for
the adjustment of them. lam not wanting m
confi lence in the Supreme C >urt of the Uni
ted States, in ail questions fallin.’ within their
acknowledged jurisdiction —-as men, I would
not hesitate to refer our cause to their umm
iage”—again—“ The states cannot consent
to refer to th? Supreme Court, as of right and
obligation, qie lions of sovereignty between
them and the United States, because the court
being of exclusive appointment bv the Govern
ment of the United Stales, it will make the
United States judge in their own cause. This
reason is equally applicable to a state tribun 4.
H nee th? difficulties likely to arise even by a
resoii to the Civ I : >r »ce»s—tnd thus you will
perceive '<» infin-dy pr • rutile it is to car
ry into eff i- mm 4*t»i?ly, '>><• mens-’r” on
templafed by the instructions to the \gem.’’
These aie the itstriictions given by secretary
of War to the Agen* above quo'ed, and bear
ing dale the 31st of January, 1827. But, to
leave nothing in doubt, we will quota the clo
sing sentence in Governor Troup’s letter to
the Georuia Delegation in Congress from
which the foreg iing q .citations ar.' m d".
“ H >p’ng that tl.e President wdl not tad in
the cmitoini I ifed negociation, and that the
matiers tn difference may be speedily nd ami
cably mjusted to the enure sa istactmn of the
parne* in toe controversy, i have not hesna
t d to m »ke to you this frank disclosure and
expi itiati<>n, that v >u may u-e it at y mr dis
crti hi, o promote the peu-e and h<>r ixinv
wliicn oiiifh ever io subsist-bei veen ihes ate
md he Uon>'d Stales, and in which, I assure
you. n uie can feel a deeper .'Oiiceru and inter
rst man
Y ours, Re-pectfullv.
G. M. IROUP.”
“ The lion, the Senators a d Kepresen i
lives ol Georgia io the Congress of die U
States.
We hsvo now shewn, that so far from th.
taci of Governor Troup’s navmg placed tti
s'a’e on the pnn-'iple .if Nullifi' ,tion in 1825
6, and 7. he a.- ually oppos 'd the nullifies i
of \L Aditns m 1825' md ilia after the'hr
»t violence m 1827. ne U'ged the aece sits
obtaining th? remaant of land, hot included in
the New treaty, by a subsequent arrangeriic nt
with the Indians—This was done as before
stated by Thomas L. M< Kinney mid J >!,
Crowell on the 15th November, and by John
Crowell on 3d December, 1827, winch ar
angemenl or treaty was communicated to the
Senate of the United states, by Mr. Adams,
or» tie 22d of January, 1827, in the following
message, and ratified on the 26th of February,
1828.”
“ To the Senate of the U. Slates :
Washington, 22d J muary, 1827.
I transmit to the Senate, fortheir consider
ation and advice, articles of agreement, signed
at the Creek Agency, on the 15th November
last, by Thom is L. M Kinney a .d J >lm Cow
ell, io behalf of the United States, and by the
Linle Pi ince, and other Chiefs and headmen
of the Creek Nation; wit!, a supplementary
article concluded oy (lie said John Crowell,
with tne chiefs and head men of the nation, in
general council convened, on the 3d instant,
embracing a cession by the Creek nation of
all the remnant of their lands within the State
of Georgia.
Documents connected with the nogocialiou,
the treaty, and the instructions under which u
was effected, are also communicated to the
Senate.
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.”
Thus it was, that the President having suc
ceeded in “ the contemplated negociatioii,”
the matters in dtff rence” were amicably ad
justed io he entire saiisfaction of tne parties
in controversy,’’ and not by nullification m>r
any oilier “ stne remedies,” as it has been so
often and confi lentiy asserted. One question
mo'e and we will close —Iftiie Union has n<>
sovereignty, vvtiat “ questions of sovereign
ty” can arise between it and the respective
suites, to be settled by “ negociauon” or oth
erwise ?
A TROUP MAN OF 1825.
From the Telegraph.
Nullification and the Nullificrs.
It is remarkable that the State Rights men,
although they all insist upon the right ot a
Si igle state to nullify, to resist the laws of the
Um: d States ai pleasure; yei there is no two
of them that derive the right from the same
principles, from the same clause or provision
of the constitution; or arrive at tho conclusion
that the right which they claim is a conslition
iil right from <he same process of reasoning.
Though the same looseness of construction,
me same disposition to base important princi
ples on inference and implication, is common
to them all; yet one takes his start from one
point, and another from another, and by steer
ing directly opposite courses, and by following
a directly opposite rain ol reasoning, they all
i.riv. it me appointed mud zvous ol nullifi
cation at lust.
Tne ultra null fiers of the Calhoun school,
ba-c 'heir d<>cum. »p »ti tne . mac, mdtvi-üblr.
sovereignty ol tne -dates. lut Slate giverii
ments, say tney, ire perfect sovereignties, and
me federal govermnuo is only their agent: and
therefore mental) governments, as me princi
pals, have a light to retuse obedience to all
those ics of their federal agent, wiieietn they
have exceeded their chartered instructions
But it would seem to >s that if the state gov
ernmeiils are the principals, and the federal
government only an a_eucy, then it would
tn ke no kmd of difference woollier an act of
the federal government was consiitutiunai or
not: me state government would tney
nave equally Hie same right of resistance —a
right based on their sovereignty could tie ex
ercised ai discretion, and that discretion would
be its only limit.
But there are others again, such as Giliner,
Foster, Gamble, who cannot go ihe
length oi asserting that ihe states are pet feet
sovereignties: they are forced to admit that
ihe Uoitied States Government is really a
govermnen : and cons'quendy they are diiven
to seek lib right of iiuHiiic.mon from some
otnei principle. As they have not cende
sceiide 1 to expi im their mode of reason) ig,
ot tne steps hy which ihey ainve at then con
clusion, we ate ef> in ‘lie daiK on this head.
Judge Beirien m Ins audre-s to the nullifi
ers ot Savannah at tneir aimiversaiy celebr >
non, and which is just now going tire rounos
in tne newspapers, tus taken anoth r view of
the subject. And as ms eloquence was in
spired the “Thing of bine, wim iritige and
tassels” which waved over mm duimg me les
Dval, his ora'iot) tn iy be taken as me «*ie< d of
tne blue school nulhficfs. lim judge does not
in express words deny the government to h: a 1
rn>n r.t, though he l ibers to show by in
fet’cuce, mat it is >my Yet he does
no thence derive tn right to milhly. Nay,
his reiH HKs on mis he >d very cieuiiy esiao
lish the conti ary.
“The p>wem (says he) which were confer
red upon the hmciiotiari. s of die sta e govern
ments, were so cotdeired by die people of
cacti s;a e to ne governed. 1 (lose which
were eiitrusied o ihe lederal agems, were con
ferred by the people of ra< h state <>cl nz con
jkiintli/ with- every other stale oj Ihe conjcaei a
cy. fu either case me powei was revok <tde
at me will oi those by wtmm it wad cumened;
because in a Gee government, n is an admixed
maxi ti, linii Hie sov< r igu'y resides wph the
people. But in the application ot this prmci >
pie lo l ose two classes ol agents, very enfi r
ent circumstances would trn tumid lo exist- ;
1 tie pow< r» winch had b en cuidvired <m the
late luuciionuriea, w<-uid ue H VoKabh at tne
• ill ol tile people <d tuesta e conferring them,
i ney alone had given, and were therefore
oinpeieut to reclaim mem. But me powers
Hiidi had been entrusted to tneir federal a
_enls, had been conJ rred by ihe people ot
ach stale, conjointly with those ot every oth
r state. It was obviously competent to the
>e< pie of any state, by their single volition,
» reclaim that which had been thus conferred i
/ die joint act of all die sia es. It would
n-relofe seem to follow that those powers
nus conferred by the joint act oi all, ami con- ■
setjuently not revokable by the separate veil- j
tion of any one slate could only be reclaimed
u the manner pointed out in the constitution,
■>r agreement between the parties, that is, by
the assent of three fourths of the states *’
Now after the admission of these broad
principles; an effort to establish nullification,
would no doubt, be a hopeless task wit h men
»f ordinary capacities. But the judge is a
practised metaphysician, and he has arrived at
the proposed point over a track that seems to
have excited the wonder and admiration of tho
nulhes themselves.
But if the judge is correct tn his reasoning
and conclusions; if ins nullification is the true
do trine, then, certainly, that of the uhr is must
fie wrong —for nothing can be m>>re d>ff ‘rent.
If it be true that the peonle of one state can.
not reclaim powers vested in the United States
government, because the instrument Conferr
ing those p overs was a compact between
themselves and the people of all the states—
then what becomes of the doctrine of the en
ure sovereignly of the stages, of the doc.nne
that a state may rightfully do whatever the
people in convention may choose to do ?
What becomes of the doctrine of secession,
and indeed of the whole catalogue of state
remedies and state action ?
But the Judge is a nullifier nevertheless.—.
Though a state cannot annul! a contract made
by all without the consent of all; yet she may
throw herself upon her sovereignty whenever
she pleases. She cannot break the contract
herself—she is indissolubly bound by it. But
she can at any time assert that congress, that
the fedeial government, have usurped powers
that do not belong to them, and by so dmng
have violate, and consequently annulled the
contract. She may at discretion assert that
the contract is annulled by the other party, and
ther-upon she herself is absolved from all its
obligations ! A state may not break the con
tract herself, she is inviolably hound by it;
but she may at any time when it suits her con
venietH'?, assume it to have be n broken by the
o her party, and may thereupon herself act
as though it were altogether abrogated ! 11—
Now this is a quibble exactly after the judge’s
own heart; and had it not been original with
him, its congeniality with the constitution of
his mind, would have ensured it a ready ac
ceptance.
But it would seem to u«, that a party to a
■ contract, from which she herself could not
rightfully withdraxv, could no’, for the same
reasons, assume ii to be violated, and conse
quently annulled, by the other party. Gwe a
party to a compact this right, and its sanction,
its binding authority is a mere mockery. It
has no sanction, no authority, other than the
caprice of the parties.
Bui the constitution of the United St ites
docs not rest upon such pi incudes. Accord
ing to the first position laid down by Judge
Berrien, it is a cornu ct m winch ill the people
<>f .11 ihe States are parties, from a inch people*
of no one stale have a right to withdraw, with-*
on the consent of the oi her. Nor has one pa*.
iy any grea er right to assume it to have bees
annulled by th'* other party, and consequently
herself realized from its sanctions. 'This
would le doing in an indirect manner, what
she confessedly could not do directly, and
the turpitude of the act would be increased,, by
the exercise of ihe fraud and deceit.
But tie Judge asks, shall we submit to (ho
exercise of usurped powers? Wo ask in re
turn, shall we resist constitution tl ones ? and
ihis bring us to another, who shall decide for
us? we answer, the umpire which all parties
itawe agreed upon. In the formation of the
constitution an umpire was established for
the settlement of disputes arising under it;
and that disputes should be thus settled, is a
I part of the con’raci, which is as binding as any
'other part. Upon this head we wd| quote t*
I paragraph from the Federalist, which from tho
origin of our government has been the text
! book of ihe Ri publicans upon all constitution
al questions.
No. 39. “It is true that in controversies
refilling io the boundary Detween the two JU
nsdictioiis the tnbun il which is ultimately to
dei-ido, is to be established tindor the general
government. Bui ibis does not change the
principle of (lie case. 'I i>e*decisi<in IS to bo
impartially made, according to tne rules of the
Coiis.itunon; and all the usual and inos effec
tual precautions are taken to secure this un«
parn ilny. Some su< h triuuti.il <s clearly es
-eritial to ptevent an appeal to llie swoid, and
a dissolution ot’ilie compact; <nd that it ought
kj be esi dilished under th* General, rather
han under ihe local (aovernmeiits; or, to
speak more properly, that :t could no safely
established under the first afirne, is a position
not lik* ly to b« comb iti d.”
If therefore the federal government, through
an appointed agent, “claim*” “to decide final*
Jy on the extent id Hs powers” it is in virtue
of the contract to which all are parties, and
which therefore cun only be revoked by the
consent of all. And even though in opposi*
tion to the will of one or more ol the states, yet
according to J ffersori the will of the majority
must prevail over that of ihe mmorov. and we
have tiie au.hordy <>f Proup for saying that
the billot box is the only mode of correcting
lne decisi ms of tue majority. From this there
i* no appeal but to furce, and force is revolu*
tion.
I —.... ,
Very late from JSTcw York— By tho fast
sailing-ship Newark. Captain Foster, from N.
Y <rk, *e n- ve received papers of that city to
V\eoii< *day inmni it'Jasi, 10m mat. inclusive,
(except Monday’.*.) and Putladelphli papers
ot i uesday. I'ne Colum >u* fiom Liverpool X
and tiie Cli.irlemagiie frmn Havre, arrived at
New York on the evening of ths 5 h, with files
oi English and French paper* to the Ist ulf.
inclusive. They contain no news of tmpor*
tance.
The celebration of (tie three days had taken
pla' e m Parts, without any disturbance.
The King of the Frencn read his speech to
the Chambers on the 31st of Juh.
Tho Cholera in Madrid, which had
A