Digital Library of Georgia Logo

Southern banner. (Athens, Ga.) 1832-1872, September 21, 1832, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

h y j ! The ferment of a fired, is preferable to the torpor of a despotic, Government. 5 VOL. I. ATHENS, GEOHOIA, SEPTEMBER 21,1882. NO. 27. UoUtecal. From ike Augusta C>iisliluti?na'isl. The following is the Circular addressed to I,h c Candidates for Congress, hy the ( ominittie lof Correspondence appointed nt the Biehmond meeting in Augusta, “ it would ho “ extremely I Jefferson and such stnte papers and decisions langerons” at any time for the pr.opi.F. to fleet op.LF.GATrs (o meet in contention, and invent tliem with Jail power to maintain, preserve and defend, the rights and privileges of the free citi zens of this State." For I am clearly of opin ion, the people are folly competent ,to act far ICountv meeting, on the 18th instant. For ton, tne people r leach of them, n copy has been directed to His themselves, and may be safely trusted with their r Post-Office. But as some of those gen- ■proper It lent an are now travelling, the Committee has I thought it advisable, to make the pr sent pul.- llicntion, with a request, that they will accept it las a substitute, for the formal letters whic h their lahscence from homo may have prevented them I from receiving. AUGUSTA, 20th August, 1822,' SIR : —Wo address you in the performance | of a duty imposed on us hy the following Reso lution, adopted at a Meeting of tho Citizens of |Richmond county; on tho 18th inst. » Resolved, That a committee of three, nnmc- |ly: Col Wm. Cumming, Judge J. P King, and ■Aug. Slaughter, Esq. bo appointed to as- Icertain, by direct correspondence with the can own rights, powers and interests, even in moment of excitement like the presentand have good sense enough to select persons who will honestly and faithfully represent their wish es and feelings. I believe every unconstitutional law of Con gress to be null and void, and has no legal force or obligation, and that each state, has a right to treat it as a nullity. I have never entertained a doubt, that the State of Georgia had the right, to claim all the Creek lands within her limits, under the treaty of the Indian Springs, and to treat, as a nullity, the treaty subsequently made, by which she was deprived of a part of that land. I believe that tho State of Georgia had the right to extend her lows over the Cherokee nn- con didates for Congress, and for the Legislature, lion . to ity and execute Tassels ; to try, con- from this connty, what are their sentiments in yict nn( , 8 ' nten to impr i S o„ m ent in the Peni- regard to nullification, and to publish such an- j tenfiaryi Worcestcr and Butter, who refused to swers as may be received. obey the laws of Georgia; and to disregard the As Members of that Commi tee, we rcspec-j dtr ision of the Supreme Court, and the inter- tifully request that you will oblige your follow ofthn fr nitcd Slatcs Q3 uncon , lilu . citizens of Richmond, hy communicating tional and void. through us, your “ sentiments m regard to mil- j Thn , //(f ^ 0 f Georgia has the right also llificution.” Their motives wil he: more P r0 P*' t0 mne y and grant the lands in the ChcMec lorly explained hy t her own acts, than by any nal{on J 0 htr nwn cilism>t in ,^1* of the said Icominentary of ours; wo have therefore taken hlmome , a nnd //[c Cherokee treaties, Ithc liberty ot annexing a complete copy of the „, c miud staUl s]wM M , h ■Preamble and resolutions which were adopted ■. vt/d g er ^ g 0)y ‘ 1 by tho meeting. We have the honor to be, sir, very respectful ly vour obodient servants, 1 ; WM. GUMMING, J. P. KING, AUG. SLAUGHTER, of our Conn-, which hove any beating upon the -ubjcct. it has been invariably explcssed, as it will continue to he, in strong terms, upon all proper occasions, nnd I will not now forbear from declaring it to be mv belief, that if the pat riots and sages who are dead, and whose wri tings have been cited to establish (lie correct ness of the doctrine of nullifiication, were alive, that they would disclaim, as Mr. Madison has done, that interpretation of their language, which has been made to aid the introduction into our system of government, of a novel state action, as a rcdiess for unconstitutional legislation, which might result cither i the dissolution of tho Union, or' in the discnnifituro of a sovereign stnte, in its pursuit of constitutional rights, by unconstitutional means. I am gentlemen, very respectfully, your obedient servant, JAMES M. WAYNE. Messrs. Cumming, Kingjmd Slaughter. Athens, August 13, 1832. To ff m. Camming, J. 1\ King, and Jl. Slaugh ter, Esqrs. Gentlemen: I have received from you, as the organ of n meeting of tho citizens of Richmond County, a communication accompanied hy their resolutions, in which a request is mude to know my “sentiments in regard to Nullification.” This shall be promptly done. Hut I owe it to a sense of self respect, as well as of candour to you, to state, that in tho fuco of your third res olution, containing a threat to vote against any candidate who advocates that doctrine, 1 should certainly have declined a compliance with the w ishes of your meeting, but for a consideration much higher than that of appeasing a political ■superfluous to copy-] J proper time for her to call a convention of tion of his country: I Editors of papers in the ac arc reques c XItE pnopt.F, to consider and adopt the proper! my wish te address I to give this an insertion. ' - ANSWERS |Received by tiic Richmond Com mittee of Correspondence, on the subject of Nullification. Columbus, 25th August, 1832. Gentlemen,—Your letter of tho 20th August listen, while perhaps the blood will curdle with fed, or the mutter is now thrown upon the gene- indignation, nt General Gnino’s despatch td that ral government to take its course.—If it yields, officer: “ Col. Chambers (said he) with five j the authority of that government has been held companies of the first, nnd Major Donoho, with ; in perfect contempt and rendered null and raid. four companies of the fourth regiment of infant-1 If it proceeds then ail tho consequences of revo- ry, have taken the positions assigned them viz. i lulionary action, anil tho effusion of blood, so the former nt Marshall’s Ferry, Flint river, nnd much dreaded, in relation to the tariff, must bo tho latter nt Princeton, Chattahoochee, with in- tho inevitable result. And I believe tho protective system, (which has been openly avowed nnd fully recognized 0 _ rr _ r by a largo majority in the last session of Con-1 denunciation, or essaying to conciliate a doubt- gross,) to ho unconstitutional; that it should' ful ihvor. It carries no terrors to me. But have no more force and effect than tho new i the crisis has arrived when every man should . avw. j treaty, the intercourse-low, or the decision of i speak out holdlv, nnd whatever may be the con- [Hero follows in the ongina , c ream c the Supreme Court; that Georgia has the same sequences to himscll, to meet them like a man, land Resolutions referred o, w licit to oug right to treat it as a nullity ; and that this is the and endeavour to savfc if possible the constitu- |juperfluous to copy.J t j 1 proper time far her to call a convention or I tion of his country: To this end it has been i the people of Georgia, ns measures to compel its repeal. I well for tao purpose of arousing thorn to u prop- “ Under these momentous circumstances, the ersense of their wrongs, as to disabuse their precise policy, which Georgia should adopt, re- j minds of a carefully lodged prejudice intended mains to lie determined. But I trust, that what-; to impni that hold on their affections, which I ever contingencies may arise, she will want. had fondly hoped had been well earned on my struetions corresponding with yours of tho 21st neither courage to sustain her honour, nor cotm-1 part. Your address has furnished that opportu ne! to temper her courage. She has no passion nity. As your meeting, doubtless, in a spirit of for change. She retains tho strongest attach-1 what it conceived to he its rights, has subjected covering tho rosolutons of tho Richmond meet-' ment to tho system of her adoption. But it her! me to a political catechism under a menace, will ling, with your request to know my “ sentiments own government wrong her with a had faith, it bo offended, if I, in my turn, without such fin regard to nulliticution,” has just been rcceiv- j which would not bo endurable in a stranger; if, rigour, seek tu know “ what are their sentiments led. When culled on by a public meeting of my complaints of our injury, are to be answered hy j in regard” to Mr. Jefferson ns a statesman? I fellow-citizens, I feel no difficulty in expressing the infliction of a greater; if she is now to be' He has merited, nnd justly received, the titlo of j my opinion upon any subject of public interest, bullied because she will not submit to be quietly' an Apostle of Freedom. He is the great ora- I when that subject is presented to me understand- duped; it needs no spirit of divination, to pro-j elo of southern politics. In his opinions every Inline.” ingly; but it is out of my power to give a specific nounco that the portents are evil. Yet I do not' statesman is safe who has the true nnd proper] What became of the new treaty? Georgia the usual forms of legislation, sanctioned by tl&o answer, in regard to a matter that 1 do not dis-1 despair. A ease so plain, appeals to tho com-J veneration for civil liberty. Will uny thing he! nullified it. She resisted tho authority of the Executive, nnd Legislative branches of govcm- tinctiy understand. So many versions and read-. man sense of our countrymen. Georgia sues has said he good authority with your meeting ! general government because its net was uncoil-; ment, hut has been pronounced constitutional ings have been given to the term '“JVullifica- 1 for no favour, advances no fictitious pretensions If so, then mark his own words, uttered in op-. stilulinnal,und being in the right, though force by tho highest Judicial power, passed all the ' 1 - ‘ r — —»-•*.-—i— • • — 1 was not only threat! nod, hut arrayed, she tri- guards that can give the stamp mid authority of umphed, and the old treaty was sustained. Fo, law, surely there can ho but little cause to dread the federal troops marched to Flint river, and a similar opposition to the tariffact founded up- then marched hack again. This is one, on an equally Hngrunt usurpation. But we are act of nullification. I understand that the only told they are not similar cases. Let us examine objection to nullification is, it has a tendency to, this point. Tho intercourse law is founded upon revolution nnd bloodshed, nnd to bring tho Cede-! that power in tho constitution, which gives to ral government into contempt. What could so Congress the right tu regulate commerce with the hy a for ign nation, for as to all ungranted (low ers it is to these states a completely foreign go vernment. The two first positions need no commentary, the last suggest these reflections. Suppose Great Britiau should pass an act lor the bene fit of her manufacturers, to operate in Georgia, what would the state do? I care not what, hut whatever was done, precisely that ought to he done, in relation to the same act passed hy tile federal government, tin tile right is wholly’ and absolutely usurped in both eases. If Foutli- arolina, our neighboring state, were to pass such a taw, every body would see its absurdity, and Georgia would nullify it in an instant) then where is the difference between one state nnd twenty-three states.' Where is the difference between the northern states doing this thing, in their separate state legislatures, or, under the pretence of constitutional authority, combining and meeting in the halls of Congress for the same purpose, if both methods be equnllly out of the pale of the constitution? Why should we not as readily resist nnd usurped act of the general government as that of any other gov ernment ? There is no reason for it, nnd in four distinct cases has the State of Georgia applied, as Mr. Jefferson calls it, this rightful i:eme- DV. May I again respectfully ask your meeting, “ what are its sentiments in regard to Govern or Troup’s political principles? Ho says,“what ever a state does in its sovereign capacity, will bo right” Acting upon this principle, in 1825, when tho general government attempted to an nuli tho old, hy what was called the netr treaty he solemnly declared it should not be done, stil ted boldly that he “ would cinplriy all the limit ed means in his power to prevent it” and order ed the Hancock troop of horse to hold them selves in readiness. What stronger “ revolu- tionarij tendency” could any measures exhibit ? But this was not ell, the Secretary of War or dered troops into the nntion to overawe the state, L. Slat/ s,) would he the usurpation of a power nevergranted by the states.” And what wns to be Ihe remedy in such cases of usurpation! Hear ken to the Governor; “Such an attempt, whenev er made, will challenge tho most determined re sistance, and if persevered in, will evidently even tuate in the annihilation of our beloved country. But was this all lie said ? No 1 The best evi dence of his firmness yet remains, and is in ex act accordance with that of Governor Troup:— “ In exercising (continued he) tho authority of tlmt department of the Government which de volves on me, 1 will DISREGARD ALL UN CONSTITUTIONAL REQUISITIONS OF WHATEVER CHARACTER OR ORIGIN THEY MAY BE, and to tho best of my ability, will protect and defend tho rights of tho State, and use the means allurdcd me, to maintnin its laws and constitution.” These are principles every way worthy of a Statesman, and such as every man should he proud, much less afraid, to avow. But let us mark {(ye issue of this mission ary ease, and here I must ask again, “what aro the sentiments of your meeting in regard” to tho Missionaries? When I affirmed in Congress thnt “ before the Missionaries would ho taken trom the Penitentiary hy virtue of the decision of the supreme court, Georgia would became a how ling wilderness,” a letter from tile city of Augusta, the place where your meeting was held, informed the Editor of the National Intel ligencer, that I did nut speak the scntimentB of the people of Georgia.. Now I had overy reason to suppose he formed iiis opinion upon tho views of his neighbors, if he spoke the truth; and if so, tho political opinions of that city are at vari ance with the rest of the good people of Georgia, lor the information thus given hy tho Augusta letter has, in all its parts, been wholly uncon firmed. And this induced me to fear that there might bo an interest in that flourishing city, not altogether in unison witii the good southern feel ing of the rest of the state. Be this as it may, the decision of the supreme court has bcenmrm- of lost month.” Did this alarm Governor Troup? Let me bring to your recollection that patriot’s reply to Mr. Adams; “The Legislature of Geor gia, will, at its first meeting, he advised to re sist any effort which may he mndo to wrest from tho state the territory acquired hy thnt treaty and no matter hy what authority thnt ef fort he made. If the legislature fail to vindicate that right, the responsibility will bo theirs, not Tho decision purports to ho founded upon tho intercourse law passed hy Congress in 1802, to regulate trade with the Indians, and also upon the solemn Treaties of tho United States, de clared hy the constitution to be the supreme law of tho land, Now it is resisted hy tho State of Georgia, upon tne ground (hat tho law and tho Treaties are unconstitutional. What is the plain and fair inference to be drawn from this ease ? If a state con rightfully resist a law which lias not only gone through tion,” thnt I do not know in what sense, it is in- J of-yesterdny ; she contends for rights alone— j position to Ihe Sedition Law, one not more un tended to bo used hy tho meeting; nnd would, rights coeval with tho republic, and emblazoned constitutional than the tarifl’act. “When (said prefer postponing a reply, till I could bo cor- J rcetly informed. Lest, however, 1 may be sub- [ joctcd to the imputation of attempting unneces- i sary delay, hy wniting till I could receive that in the rights of its birth. Let the sober wisdom this great man) pow ers are assumed, which of tho nation, ponder on her claims, unbiassed have not been delegated, a NULLIFICATION hy tho flippancy of past fanaticism, or the astute • of the ACT is the R1GI1TFUL REMEDY : A l i j u ■ 'im...» vvrnv a'p anw .. wiTtmiT follies of scholastic jurisprudence. Under such information, I will endeavour, so far as I am able, i correction, all may yet bo well. But if this to comply with that request, and proceed to give last hope is to fail; if Georgia is indeed pro scribed ; if insulting lyrraimy, marking her for a victim, presents to her option, the sole alterna tive of danger or degredation—Speak tombs of tho Revolution ! For you can proclaim her choice!” My opinions and feelings, have been well ex pressed by “ Oglethorpe,” in the proceeding pa- sulting from tho compact to which the States are! ragrnph. I do not desire to go farther. If these parties, as limited by the plain sense and inten- j opinions subject mo to tho charge of “ nullifica tion of tho instrument constituting the compact, tion,” I nra willing to abide the consequences, and as no furthor valid, than they are authoris- j They arc dearer to me than any office of the cd hy the grant enumerated in that compact; I Stale or tho United States within the gift of the and that in case of a deliberate, palputle, and; people. I will not give them up ; I will not re- threat of your meeting can never come to soon dangerous exercise of oilier powers, not granted tract them, though even Calhoun or McDuffie for my own inclination. I you my opinions I agreo then, with tho third Virginia Resolu tion, which I have long made part if my politi cal text book, and which reads thus :— “ That this assembly,” (tho Virginia Legis lature,) “ doth explicitly declare, that it views the powers of the Federal Government, as re- That EVERY STATE has a NATURAL RIGHT, in cases not within tho compact, to NULLIFY, of their OWN AUTHORITY, all assumptions of power by other.?, WITHIN THEIR LIMITS : that without this right, they would he under tho dominion, absolute Rnd unlimited, of whomsoever might exercise this right of judgement for them.” Here then, you have my opinion in full. Of Mr. Jefferson's political creed I shall never be afraid or ashamed. Whenever his doctrines cease to be considered orthodox, hy the south ern people, for they never were in odour in the north, I feel entirely confident I am unfit to be their representative, and the execution of the by [tie said compact, the Slutes, who are the par ties thereto,have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress oj the evil, and for maintaining within ilietr respective lim its the authorities, rights and liberties appertain ing to them.” I believe, with Mr. Madison, “ That when resort can be had to no tribunal superior in au thority to the parties, the parties, themselves, must he the rightful judges, in the last resort, whether the bargain made has been pursued or violated." “That the States are the parties to the constitutional compact, in their sovereign capa city, and of necessity, that there can be no tri bunal above their authority, and consequently that as the pa ties to it, they must themselves de cide, in th^ last result, such question us may he of sufficient magnitude to justify their interposi tion.” I believe, therefore, thnt the Supreme Court of the United Stntes is natof superior authority to the States; and, with Mr. Jefferson, “ that the judges of the same are not the ultimate ar biters of all constitutional questions;” that it would be dungcruus to grant them that power, and would lead to the despotism of an Oligar chy ;” and with him, I also believe, “ that the ultimate arbiter is. the people, acting by llieir de puties in conventions I am, therefore, brought to the conclusion, that the Legislature of tho state cannot, but that the people of each state, acting hy their deputies in convention, must, in all “cases which are of sufficient magnitude to justify their inter position,” determine upon the proper mode and measure of redress, for every violation of the constitution. And I cannot believe, with the should approve and adopt them. 1 am, gentlemen, very respectfully, yours, SEABORN JONES. Messrs. Cumming, King and Slaughter. SPARTA, 24th August, 1832. -I have just received from you, It is true that Mr. Jefferson has not pointed out the mode nnd manner of nnllyfying a law; but this must bo left to tho wisdom and discre tion of the state whose rights aro invaded hy tho assumed power, nnd must he as various as the acts aro varied that violate tho ciinstitution. Any plan, I enro not what it is, that rids the effectually produce nlf theso events as (ho ease I have just mentioned ? The second instance was tho enso of Tassels. Indian Tribes. Tho tariff act is said to rest upon the right to regulate commerce w ith foreign nations. Now mark, both of these pow ers are A mandate was sent from the supremo Court of found side hy side, in the 8th section of the 1st the United States, to suspend his execution until ; article of tho federal constitution. Suppose both he could he heard before that Court on a writ of j laws, for tho first time, had hern passed ot tho error. What said ihe legislature ? last Congress. The first, containing a provis- “Resolved, That the Governor and every oth- > ion that the Cherokee nation of Indians within or officer of this state disregard any and every the limits of Georgia, wns an independent na- Gcntlemen as a Committee of tho citizens of Richmond j state of the oppressive measure, is a nullifica- county, your circular of the 20th instant, re- tion of that measure. To nulliliy is simply questing me to communicate through you to nothing more nor less tlwn to render null and your constitutents, my “ sentiments in regard to j void. All unconstitutional laws are null and nullification.” The answer shall be as brief and explicit us the enquiry. I do not believe nul lification to bo either a peaceable or efficient remedy against tho oppressions of the tariff) and I ain entirely opposed to it. With sentiments of highest respect, your ohdt’t. serv’t. CHARLES EATON HAYNES. Messrs. Cumming, King and Slaughter. Washington, (Wilkes)August 6,1832. Gentlemen,—The people of Richmond, hav ing exercised the truly democratic right of end ing upon candidates for their suffrages, to de clare their sentiments in regard to Nullification; I will express mine by adopting the words of one of their resolutions. I believe “the doctrine false in theory,” anil think, “that in practice, it would prove most disastrous to our country.” Such was my conclusion after having plten- tively read and ronsidered the exposition of the Vice President and all that has been written in favor of Nullification by other gentlemen in South-Carolina, in connection with the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798—the report of Mr. Madison in 1799—the writings of Mr. void. Is this objected to? I presume not. Then your meeting, in its very first resolution, has declared that the tariff art is “ unjest und in consistent with the spirit of the constitution.” Is it too much to say that an unjust law, one in consistent with the spirit of the constitution, ought to be null and void? As much us this doctrine is now derided, I affirm, without the fear of contradiction, that it is the very doctrine upon which Georgia has acted from the founda tion of her government. And I wil] now prove it. I luy dow n these positions: 1st. Thnt an unconstitutional law is NO LAW', and no man or community is bound to obey it, nay they are bound to resist it, for every inan is sworn to support the constitution. 2d. A law “ unjust and inconsistent with the spirit of the constitution,” is a violation of the constitution, because it is a perversion of that instrument, a perversion is u breach of its inten tion, and according to all rules of construction, legal or moral, the intention must govern. 3d. Thnt the General government can pass no law for which it does not find an authority in thh constitution, mid that if it does, it is no more binding upon tiic states than if passed mandate und process thnt has been or shall he served upon him or them, proceeding from tho supreme court of the United Ftatcs, for the pur pose of arresting any of the criminal law s of this state.” Resolved, That the Govcmo/, with all thoforce nnd means placed at his command, resist and repel nny nnd every invasion from w hatever quar ter, upon the administration of the criminal laws of this state.” What language can he stronger? And do not the resolutions imply the probability of a conflict that the State might have to battle it with the General Government! But when the consti tutional rights of a slate arc violated what ether alternative is left ? We read from the lessens of the Revolution tlmt the motto of our forefa thers was liberty or death,and so far,I am proud to say the conduct of Georgia has evinced to tho world a noble vindication of the maxim. In reference to the third instance, 1 must beg leave again to reiterate the .enquiry to your meeting, “ what aro its sentiments in regard” to tho political course of Governor Lumpkin? For whatever may he their objections to that of Gov ernor Troup, so for as relates to these doctrines, he has been fully supported hy the present Gov' ernor. At tho Inst session of tho legislature, Governor Lumpkin communicated to that body, that he had received two citations commanding the State of Georgia to appear in tho supreme court, to show causo why the judgments render ed in our state court against Worcester and But ler, should not be set aside. What said the Gov ernor on that occasion ? That which ought to command the admiration of every friend of state rights.. “ Any nttempt (said he) to infringe the evident right of the state to govern the entire population within its territorial limits,and to pun ish all offences committed against its laws, with in those limits, (due regard being had to the ea ses expressly incepted by the constitution of tho tion, and not subject to tho laws of Georgia.' The second, containing u provision that the peo ple of Georgia should pay u tux to the northern capitalists to protect their manufactures. What would Georgia do with the first law? Need I answer tlmt she has already nullified precisely such a law, in the present intercourse law, and the derision founded thereon. If then she would nullity tiio first law , can there he a sensible dif ference, in point of effect or principle, between that and the last ? It is said their difference is in their consequences, the first applies to a sin gle state, the other to all the states : and pray what has one sovereign stnto to do with tho rights of other sovereign states in their seperute capacities I It is not recolloctrd that one state lias nothing to do with knottier, only in the stipulated articles that have confederated them together, and so soon as tho confederated gov ernment passes u law out of these articles, each state throws itself upon its original sep- erate rights, and may employ whatever means it pleases to prevent the operation of that law, or if it chooses it may submit to its authority. Tho other states may desire the protective sys tem, indeed more than two thirds clamor for i|. ( tan this be any good reason why Georgia shall submit to it. Suppose all (lie other States, like Louisiana nnd Kentucky, should he bought up and bccomo reconciled to the late act, cun it be contended that Ge-wgia must become so too? Does it net occur to every mind that there can be no possi ble difference between robbing tho States, by piece meal, of (heir constitutional rights, or do ing it in one general attack upon the whole sis terhood? The rcasoqing that would aftemptto make a difference will establish this position. If a refiian attacks a single individual, hq must re pel him immediately, but it ho attacks him in company with twenty-three others, sixteen of wheia arc willing te be robbed, and tho other