Newspaper Page Text
THE
Will hepublished entry SATURDAY Afternoon,
In the Tieo-Story tVouden Building, at the
Corner of Walnut and Fifth Street,
IS THE CITY OF MACOS, GA.
By WOT. B. IIA It HI.SOX.
TERMS:
For the Paper, in advance, per annum, $2
if not paid in advance, $3 00, per annum.
Advertisements will b« inserted at the usual
rites—-and when the number of insertions dc
jired is not specified, they will be continued un
til forbid and charged accordingly.
O’Advertisers by the Year will be contracted
with upon the most favorable terms.
□“Sales of Land by Administrators,Executors
or Guardians, are required by Law, to be held on
the first Tuesday in the month, between the hours
of ten o’clock in the Forenoon and three in the
Afternoon, at the Court House of the county in
which the Property is situate. Notice of these
Sales must be given in a public gazette Sixty Days
previous to the day of sale.
iLpSalcs of Negroes by Administators, Execu
tors or Guardians, must be at Public Auction, on
the first Tuesday in the month,between the legal
hours of sale, before the Court llo* «e of the county
where the LettersTestamentary.or Administration
or Guardianship may have been granted,first giv
ing notice thereof for Sixty Days, ,in one of the
public gazettes of this State,and at the door of the
Court House where such sales are to be held.
□“Notice for the sale of Personal Property
must be given in like manner Forty Days pre
vious to the day of sale.
□“Notice to the Debtors and Creditorsolan es
tate must be published for Forty Days.
that application will be made to the
Court of Ordinary for leave to sell Land or Ne
itroes must be published in a public gazette in the
Si&te for Four Months, before any orderabsolute
c an be given by the Court.
□“Citations for Letters of Administration on
an Estate, granted by the Court of Ordinary, must
be published Thirty Days for Letters of Dismis
sion from the administration ofan Estate,monthly
for Six Months —for Dismission from Guardian
ship Forty Days.
□“Rules for the foreclosure of a Mortgage,
must be published monthly for Four Months—
for establishing lost Papers, for the full space of
Uree Months —for compelling Titles front Ex
ecutors, Administrators or others, where a Bond
basbeen given by the deceased, the full space of
Three Months.
N. B. Ail Business of this kind shall receive
prompt attentionat the SOUTHERN TRIBUNE
Olfice, and strictcare will be taken thatall legal
Advertisements are published according to Law.
□“All Letters directed to this Office or the
Editor on business, must be post-paid, to in
sure attention.
IT. CTJSLEY & SCIT 5
JURE no USE 4- COMMISSIONMER CHANTS
WILL continue Business at their “Fire-
Proof Buildings,” on Colton
Avenue, Macok, Ga.
Thankful for past favors, they beg leave to say
they will be constantly at their post, and that no
efforts shall be spared to advance the interest of
tlieir patrons.
They respectfully ask all who have COTTOJS
or other PRODUCE to Store, to call and exam
ine the safety of their Buildings, before placing
it elsewhere.
(□“Custom arv Advances on Cotton in Store
or Shipped, and all Business transacted at the
usual rates.
june 2 2r—ly
DAVID It E I D ,
Justice oj the Peace and Notary Public.
MACON, G A .
COMMISSIONER OF DEEDS, &c., for the
V 7 States of Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Missouri,
New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Penn
sylvania, Oliio, Indiana, Illinois, Arkansas, New
Jersey, Maine, &r.
\ Depositions taken, Accounts probated, Deeds
| and Mortgages drawn, and all docun.ents and
instruments of writing prepared and authentica
ted for use and record, in any oflhe above States.
Residence on Walnut Street, near the African
Church.
□*Public Office adjoining Dr.M.S.Thomson’s
Botanic Store, opposite the Floyd House,
june 29 25—ly
WILLIAM WILSON,
HOUSE CARPENTER AND CONTRACTOR,
Cherry Street near Third , Macon, Ga.
MAKES and keeps on hand Doors, Blinds
and Sashes for sale. Thankful for past
favors he hopes for further patronage,
may 25 20—Gin
WOOD & LOW,
GENERAL COMMISSION MERCHANTS,
NEW ORLEANS, LA.
may 25 20—ly
Icc Cream Saloon,
Cotton Avenue, next door below Ross 4' Co's.
OPEN from 10 o’clock, A. M. to 10 P. M.,
daily, Sundays excepted. The Ladies'
Slaoon detached and fitted up for their comlort,
in a neat and pleasant style,
june 22 H. C. FREEMAN.
MALI, & BRANTLEY,
HAVE just received a well selected assort
ment o( DRY GOODS and GROCERIES,
Which embraces almost every article in their
1 line of business. These Goods make their stock
Intensive, which lias been selected recently by
l"ne of the firm, and they are determined to sell
1 their Goods upon reasonable terms, and at the
lowest prices. Whilst they are thankful for past
[favors, they respectfully invite tlieir friends and
the public to call aDtheir Store on Cherry Street,
and examine tlieir Goods and prices, before pur
chasing elsewhere.
march 23 11
OTacon Caiuly manufactory*
UIMIE Subscriber still continues to mnrufnc-
I * lure CANDY of every variety, next door
below Itoss & Co’s, on Cotton Avenue. Hav
‘Pg increased my facilities and obtained addi
"onal Tools, I am now prepared to put lip to
order, CAN DIES, of any variety, and war
rantcil equal to any manufactured in the South.
I also manufacture a superior article ofl.emon and
°lher SYRUPS, CORDIALS,]\rRESERVES,^.
All my articles are well packed, delivered at
,In y point in the Citv and warranted to give
'■Uisfac.tion. 11. C. FREEMAN, Agent,
march 9 9
I WOT. S. LAWTON & CO.
I ,l ctors and Commission Merchants, Macon, Ga
I*7ILL make advances on shipments to their
Houses, LAWTON & DOWELL, Sn-
Ga. ; and LAWTON, DOWELL &
Charleston, S. C.
a "g 31 31—ts
THE SOUTHED! TRI BUNE.
NEW SERIES— VOLUME 11.
13 0 l f t C c a l.
From the Southern Press.
Tlie Randolph Epistles on the
ltiglit of Secession.
NO. 111.
Mr. Webster’s Contrast—Curious scraps
from History—Secessionneverdenied ’till
18 yours ago — J. Q. Adams — Edward
Licingston and the Proclamation—lie
drafted it — Van Burcn and Livingston
vs. Judge Barbour — Livings'on vs. him
self — Mr. Madison's letier — Mr. Ran
dolph and Secession — Mr. Tazwell and
Secession — Dr. Cocke of the Virginia
Senate — The most obnoxkus feature of
the Proclamation disavowed in the Globe,
and by authority, tfr.
To his Excellency, Millard Fillmore,
President of the United States :
Sir : It was somewhat inaccurate to
have said as I did in my first Epistle, that
the tight of secession had never been dis
cussed; it was scrupulously true however,
as I stated, that the question had never
arisen —had never been up for judgment;
and as to every department of this Gov
ernment, it bad remained an issue, coram
atm judicc. Notwithstanding that howev
er, I find, no recurring to the proceedings
in Virginia, that it was much discussed
there, and what is more to the purpose,
that in Mr. Webster's speech on the
Force Bill, he did incidentally discuss the
right of secession, and that lie denied the
right. He did not indeed fall into the
fore ordained blunder, which Mr. Clay so
unaccountably put upon the Senate, of
confounding Nullification with Secession—
hut on the contrary, diew a contrast be
tween them, and in Mr. Clay’s hearing,
which no man could have heard and for
gotten. He said:
“Secession would, it is true, abandon
the Constitution altogether; but it would
profess to abandon it. Whatever other in
consistencies it might run into, one, at
least it would avoid. It would not belong
to a Government, while it rejected its au
thority. It would not repel the burthen,
and continue to enjoy the benefits. It
would not aid in passing laws which others
are to obey, and yet reject tlieir authority
as to itself. It would not untiertake to re
concile obedience in public authority, with
an asserted right of command over that
same authority. It would not be in the
Government and above the Government at
the same time !”
Before marshalling the proofs which at
test that the Constitution is a compact, &c.
as announced in the postcript of my last
epistle, there are a few curious scraps from
history, wiih which I would freshen up
your Excellency’s memory. I take for
granted that so pregnant a circumstance
as the origin and dale of the first denial of
the right of secession has not escaped you,
and that it occurred less than IS years ago,
and first saw the light in General Jackson’s
proclamation of December 10, 1532, a
gainst South Carolina’s Ordinance of Nul.
lification. Until then, I had undertook to
say, that in the whole history of the Con
stitution, not a vestige remains of that in
valuable right having ever been brought
to question. Not a word recorded in the
Madison Papers, casts a doubt upon the
subject. Nothing that occurred in the
Convention—nothing written in the Fed
eralist—no construction of the Constitu
tion upon the powers delegated or reserved
during the administration of Washington
or the elder Adams, ever brought into
doubt; while the very memorable instance
I have already given to your Excellency,
touching Kentucky’s famous memorial in
1795 solemnly and boldly announcing her
purpose of seceding from the Union, with
the implications arising from the silence
and acquienscence of Washington and
his cabinet, of their concession of the right,
carries with it overwhelming testimony in
its favor. And in far more recent times,
(1844-s,)such free and hold constructions
of Federal powers as Mr. John Quincy
Adams, and large majorities of the two
Houses of the Legislature, resolved and
declared in suhtsance, that the annexation
of Texas would he such a breach of the
Constitution, asto justify and authorize her
secession from the Uuion, and it was her
standing menace for a twelve-month, that
if Texas came into the Union, that Mas
sachusettes would go out of it! There’s
potential secession for yon, boldly and
most explicitly avowed ! —and the bruit of
the times greatly belied Mr. Webster, if
he did not counsel and defend her in the
right she asserted!
At the time of the proclamation, and for
some time, Edward Livingston, a man of
great ability and ardently attached to Gen
oral Jackson, was Secretary of State, and
MACON, (GA.,) SATURDAY AFTERNOON, SEPTEMBER 7, 1850.
it has long since passed into history, that
he was the draftsman of that celebrated
paper. Some twelve months or more
before this, an unfortunate rupture took
place between General Jackson and Mr,
Calhoun, then the Vice President of the
United States, and which the friends of
the latter wholly attributed to some dark
intrigue of Mr. Martin Vanßuren. Some
time after this, and when the last crisis
was approaching in the affair of South Ca
rolina, she claimed the services of Mr
Calhoun in the Senate of the United States,
and he resigned the Vice Presidency, and
excepted that trust. In November 1832,
the Presidents election was to take place.
1 he Democratic party generally took up
Mr. f an Buren, on General Jackson’s
ticket. In Pennsylvania, Virginia, and
North Carolina, considerable objections
prevailed in that party against Mr. Van
Luren. In Pennsylvania, Judge Wilkins
I was taken in opposition, and he obtained
her electoral vote. In Virginia, the Leg
islative caucus in nominating Presidential
electors in favor of Jackson, left them un
pledged as to the Vice Presidency, and
two tickets with the same electors, were
run there, the one Jackson and Van Buren,
the other Jackson and Barbour. Now
Genet al Jackson was greatly attached to
fan Buren and having himse'f made
Philip P. Barbour a Judge of the Su
preme Court of the United States, was
deeply incensed at his lending himself in
opposition to the regular Democratic nom
ination and Mr. Livingston fully shared
in his resentment. Let me now cast back
a little: When Judge Barbour’s name
was brought forward, same friends of his
in North Carolina catechised both Mr.
Van Buren and himself on the great top
ics of the day, and responding, both of
them denied the right of nullification ; but
Judge Barbour emphatically asserted the
right of secession, while Mr. Van Buren
said nothing at all about it. Judge B’s
letter hears date September 9, 1832, and
he thus responded upon these topics:—
“1 he last subject embraced in (he reso
lution is that of nullification. I under
stand this term as meant to import the
right of the several States, by interposing
their sovereign power, to declare void,
within their respective borders, any law
which they may think unconstitutional.
“Thus understanding it, I am opposed
to it. 1 will endeavor briefly to State my
doctrine upon the subject. In general,
when a question arises, whether an act of
Congress is constitutional ornot, it belongs
to the judicial department to decide it, be
cause in general, the question arises in a
case, either “in law or equity,” that is, in a
controversy between parties, which had
taken a shape far judicial decision. But
when the question is one of political power
that between the Federal Government and
the States, whether the former has invad
ed the reserved rights of the latter, I hold
that questions of this kind do not belong
to judicial cognizance. That the people
cf the States are parties to the compact,
in their character of States: That the
Constitution has not conferred upon the
judicial department any political power
whatever: That therefore, in relation to
questions of this character,there is no com
mon umpire: and that consequently, the
States must decide for themselves: This is
the Right, —hut what is the Remedy ? My
opinion is, that thf.only kighlful reme
dy IS THAT OF SECESSION.”
Now, it is said, that Mr. Livingston, un
der the sway of his resentments and blind
ed by his impulses, lugged the question of
secession into the proclamation and contro.
verted the right, for the ungenerous pur
pose of crushing Judge Barbour under
the overwhelming weight of the Presi
dent’s popularity, and making him in fact,
what many of theDetnocratic journals pro
nounced him to he, at the close of the
election, '‘politically dead." I have great
respect for the memory of Mr. Livingstoiq
and I will not vouch that this is true ; but
I owe it to truth to say, that there were
circumstances, which made the charge sig
nificantly plausible. No one could have
known better titan Livingston, that the
question of secession was wholly out of
place in a proclamation, directed against
an ordiance maintaining and exercising
a right of nullification and nothing more.
Secession therefore was coram non judicc.
South Carolina had neither asserted it—
nor menaced it, nor exercised it. These
two functions of opposition could not have
existed together, as they were entirely in.
compatible with each other, for under tho
one, no rights whatever were maintainable
out of the Union, nor under the other with
in it. There was another circumstance,
morever, still more significant. The doc
trines of the proclamation, that the Fed
eral Constitution had been formed hv the
people of the United States in their ag
gregate capacity, and thereby constituted
us a Nation of men, instead of a Union of
States to which a right of secession must
necessarily have been (as I shall show
hereafter) both an incident and a muni
ment, utterly belied the Democratic prin
ciples and sentiments of Mr. Livingston’s
whole public life; and in less than two
years before, he had controverted and with
mastery skill, these very doctrines of the
proclamation, when asserted by Mr. Web
ster in the famous debate betweeu him
and Mr. Hayne of South Carolinia, on
Foote’s Resolution ! Note these passa
ges:
“That in cases in which a law of the
United States may infringe the constitu
tional right ol a State, hut which in its
operation cannot be brought before the
Supreme Court under the terms of the
jurisdiction expressly given to it, that
COURT IS NOT CREATED THE UMPIRE, be
tween a State that may deem itself aggriev
ed, and the General Government.”
“1 hat if the act he one of those few
which cannot he submitted to the Supreme
Court, and be one that will, in the opinion
of the State, justify the risk of a withdraw
alfrom the Union, that this last extreme
remedy may at once be resorted to."
"That the theory of the Federal Govern
ment, being the result of /hegeneral will of
the people of the United States in their ag
gregate capacity, and founded in no degree,
on compact beiween the Stales, would tend
to the most disastrous practical results :
l HAT IT WOULD PLACE THREE-FOURTHS OF
the States at the mercv of one-fourth
AND LEAD INEVITABLY TO A CONSOLIDATED
GOVERNMENT, AND FINALLY TO MONARCHY.”
Mr. Livingston himself was so well sa
tisfied with the soundness of the doctrines
he had thus laid down, that he enclosed a
copy ot this speech to Mr. Madison, well
knowing that he, though opposed to nulli
fication,had all his life maintained the right
of secession. On the sth of May, 1830,
Mr. Madison replied to the note accompa
nying his speech, and after commending
its ability, among other things said :
“\ou have succeeded better in your in
terpretations of the Virginia proceedings
in 1798—'99, than'hose who have seen in
them a coincidence with the nullifyingdoc
trine so called. * * * The error in
the late comments on the Virginia pro
ceedings, has arisen from a failure to dis
tinguish between what is declaratory of
opinion and what is ipso favto executory,
between the rights of the parties and of a
single party; and between resorts within
the purview of the Constitution, and the
final right, which appeals from a Constitu
tion, cancelled by its abuses, to original
RIGHTS, PARAMOUNT TO ALL CONSTITU
TIONS.”
From all this it is manifest, that Mr
Livingston’s real principles, tallied to a
nicety with those of Judge Barbour,(whose
lights and models were Messrs. Jefferson
and Madison) and were utterly repugnant
to the doctrines he put forth in the far
famed proclamation, which produced deep
discontent, and many fatal schisms in the
South, and especially in Virginia, the im
pregnable fortress of State Rights and De
mocracy. Many of Gen. J ackson’s warm
est and ablest friends, rose up in remon
strance and protested against doctrines so
tinctured and tainted with the bane of
federalism, that they had brought Daniel
Webster and the federalists en masse into
their suppoit, To say nothing of the
marks of wide-spread dissatisfaction with
which the Virginia journals teemed, —
there were two of the most remarkable
man of the times, and who had largely
contributed to Gen. Jackson’s elevation,
now took decided ground against such of
the doctrines of the proclamation : These
were the celebrated John Randolph of
Roanoke, —and the other the ablest and
most distinguished of the living celebrities
of Virginia , Littleton Walter Tazewell. —
Mr. Randolph, then in shattered health,
and in repugnance to the habits of his
whole life, drafted a series of resolutions,
and read them from the hustings at a large
public meeting at Charlotte Court House,
and made one of his most brilliant efforts
in their support. These Resolutions were
eleven in number, but I can only spare the
space for a few of them as follows.—
“Resolved,That while we retain a grate
ful sense of the many great and valuable
services of Andrew Jackson to the United
States, we owe it to our country and to
posterity, to make our solemn protest a*
gainst many of the doctrines of his late
proclamation.
“Resolved, That Virginia “is, and of
right ought to he, a free, sovereign and in
dependent Stale That she became so
by her own sovereign act, which has since
been recognized by all the civilized world
and has never been disavowed, retracted,
or in anywise impaired or weakened by
any subsequent act of hers.
“Resolved, That Virginia has never
parted with the right to recedl the authority
so dele gated for good and sufficient cause,
nor with the right to judge of the sufficiency
of such cause, and to scccdc from, the con
NUMBER 35.
fedcrary, whenever we shall find the benefit
of union exceeded by its evils —union being
the means of securing happiness, and not
an end, to which they should be sacrificed.
“Resolved, That while we utterly re
probate the doctrine of Nullification as
equally weak and mischievous, we cannot
for that reason, give our countenance to
principles, equally unfounded and in the
highest degree dangerous to the liberties
of the people.”
Another of the Resolutions aimed a
sharp thrust at Mr. Livingston as one of
the “designing counsellors,” who wished
to influence General Jackson “to disavow
the principles to which he owed his eleva
tion to the Chief Magistracy of the Gov
ernment of the United States, and to trans
fer his retd friends and supporters, hound
hand and foot to his and their bitterest ene
mies—the ultra Federalists—ultra Bank—
ultra Tariff—ultra Internal Improvement
and. Hartford Convention men—the habitual
scoffers at State Rights, and to their instru
ment, the venal and prostituted jrress, by
which they have endeavored-, and but too
sneres fully, to influence and mislead public
opinion."
Mr. Tazewell took a somewhat different,
but equally effective course. He wrote
thirteen numbers in the Norfolk Herald
upon the President’s Proclamation over
the signature of "a Virginian," but his
nomine de plume formed no more disguise
in marking the real author, than does that
of “Randolph of Roanoke,” the very
hunmble person who indites you these
Epistles. The whole series were written
with the most commanding ability—as will
be amply attested through the liberal quo
tations from the last number, with which
I propose to strengthen my ptevious posi
tions, and to enrich and adorn my present
Epistle. He thus annonnees the right
and the remedy for breaches of the Con
stitution:
“The unionofthe States thus reslingtipon
a Covenant, entered into by every State
with its co States —when then the terms of
this Covenant are supposed to bo bro
ken by any of them, as there is no common
arbiter to decide between the parties, it is of
necessity , that each State must judge for
itself, and act as its own judgment may die
tale. If in the honest exercise of this judg
ment any sovereign State declares the Cov
enant broken by its co- States, and chooses to
dissolve the Union thereby established for
this cause, she has the perfect right to do
so; and this makes secession from the Union
as to that parly only."
There sir! That's an interpretation of
the nature of this Government and of
the powers of the States over its unity and
destinies, from the first legal mind and
the most brilliant living genius of this
broad land, the accomplished but unambi
tious Mansfield of this continent. It was of
him the bruitcameand lives tot'nisday, that
at the close of an overpowering argument
in the Virginia Court of Appeals, in reply
to his greatest living rival (Walter Jones)
that Virginia’s brightest, wisest, greatest
Judge save one (John Marshall) —carried
away by Tazewell’s reasonings and ora
tory, forgot that he was a Judge, and
above all, that he was Spencer Roane!
and in a transport of applause and ex
claimed, ‘Great God! wiiat a man Taze
well is !”
I would now specially call your Excel
lency’s notice to further passagesfrom this
brilliant article, as strikingly apposite to
those menacing hints in your recent mes
sage of wielding the military and naval
forces of the Government against one sov
ereign State, for defending her integral
limits from a rebellious dismemberment,
and forspurning the sordid bribe to be
offered her upon a sabre’s point, and a
gainst another,for seceding from a jurisdic
tion fruitful and tolerant of oppression born
of violated faith and a broken covenant.
They may satisfy your Excellleticy.that so
wanton a shedding of brethren’s blood, as
the message suggests and defends, might
prove as utterly impotent for its objects,
as the whole country is acknowledging it
would be, foully criminal and unspeakably
calamitous! The author vividly depicts
the politial consequences of such an Ex
ecutive war upon a seceding State. He
says:
“Such a war will differ from every other
that has before occurred from the begin
ning to that day; because, even by the most
complete success, its avowed object, can
never be attained. Independence, con
quest, reparation of wrongs, security pun
ishment of indigity offered, may all be
achieved by successful war; hut victory can
never make union, or repair the breach of
tls broken covenant.'' * * * “The
war waged to revive a broken covenant of
union, can never attain its avowed end.
It may bring conquest, may make loyal
subjects, or hollow-hearted pretended al
lies, but ts cannot make real union. The
union of free States can neither be made
nor preserved by force. It is solicism so
to speak. Such a fanciful union is con
solidation in its most abhorrent form—
wherein the majority will wield not only
its own powers, hut those assigned to their
subdued allies also l
“I thank God! that in his infinite wisdom
and mercy, he has been pleased thus to
ordain. Ihe tuth9 I have announced,
ought and will teach moderation and for
bearance to all who value the union of
these States. Each will look to the fear
ful couscquencos to itself, that may. attend
BOOK AND JOB PRINTING,
Will he executed in the neatest style,
and on the best tertns, at the
~ f •' Office of the ‘ ' j
&CTFTKEJI2T TPJBTJITS!
—BY—
•• WM, B. HARRISON:
its own acts, and will abstain from pushing
even admitted fiowefs to oppression. The
RIGHT OF SECESSION IS THE RIGHT OF ALL.,
—lt may be claimed by one to-day
and another to-morrow, as each may find’
itself aggrieved. Its apprehended evihi
may easilybe guarded against, by not ex
ercising doubtful powers, nor pressing let
gilunate powers, until they become doubtful!
The security of the Union is to be found
in the commofi affections and common
interests of the States, and not in the bay
onets of its soldiery. By such feefling#
alone, was the. Union first formed—by
such sentiments alohe, h3S it been since
maintained, and by such sentiments alone,
can it be preserved. Once deny Tuts righ t
of SECESSION WHEN IT IS CLAIMED, AND PRE
VENT OR PUNISH ITS EXERCISE BY MILITARY
FORCE, AND SURELY AS NIGHT SICCEF.DH
THE DAY, OUR DESTINY AS A FREE PeOTLE
IS FULFILLED !”
Once more, that I may bring hi! high
authority to sustain the position I
took in my first epistle that the right of
secession is a reserved right, and consequent
ly a State right, under the 10th amend
ment of the Constitution of the United
States. With a single thought, thus skil
fully put, he crushes at a blow, all Mr.
Livingston’s disingenuous heresies in the
proclamation :
“According to his idea it would seem
that there are no constituiotial rights, but
such as are granted by the Constitution :
According to mine, every right- and every
power too, not disparaged by any of the
grants ond prohibitions contained in the
Constitution, are especial/y reserved therein,
and so become constitutional rights andjiow
ers: The right of secession thus becomes a
constitutional right."
These numerous and powerful assaults
upon Gen. Jackson’s proclamation by his
own political friends, and especially a Re
solution offered in the Virginia Senate,
which he regarded as wholly mistaking the
true intendments of that paper, “as he un
derstood it,” at last took the matter into
his own hands, ami by his express author
ization, the following comment was made
upon the Resolution in the editorial co
lumns of the Washington Globe :
“The annexed Resolution offered by Dr.
Cocke of the Senate of Virginia, shews
that the opposition to the proclamation in
the Legislature, has grown out of a total
misconception of its meaning:
“Resolved, That the Federal Constitu
tion is a compact, originally formed be
tween separate,independent and sovereign
States, whereby each State,upon the terms
and for the equivalent therein expressed,
voluntatily agreed to vest a portion of its
sovereignty in a common head, to be ex
ercised by the joint will and deliberations
of all the parties, reserving to itself the ex
clusive enjoyment of the residue; and the
contrary doctrine maintained by some,
and set forth, in the late proclamation of
the President of the U. S. that the Federal
Constitution results from the people in the
aggregate and not from the States in their
sovereign capacity, is a fallacious and un
founded assumption not warranted by the
history of the formation of that instru
ment; opposed to the true theory of our
Government as expounded by the re
solutions of this assembly in 1798
and 1799, and would tend in practice to
tho most disasterous consequences, giving
to a minority of the States, having a majori
ty of the population tho control over the
other States, —conslidaling the States intb
one nation, and leading unavoidably to’
the transformation of our federative sjs
tern into a single Government ‘‘without
limitation of powers.”
Now for the Globe’s comments :
“It appears from this, that the proclama
tion is understood to assume the ground,
that the Federal Constitntion is tlth crea
ture of th e people of United States, as air
aggregate mass— one great community; &
that it would therefore give "to a minority
of the States, having a majority of thepojr
ulation, a control over the other States," Sfc.
“The proclamation, so far ftom assuming
that the Constitution is the tvotk of the
people of the Union, as one people, asserts
that it is a compact, formed by the peo
ple of the United States, acting as separate
communities, —first, through their State
legislatures, in providing the means of
ftaming the terms of Union through a joint
constitution, and the “acting in separate
cimventions,” to ratify the provisions de
termined on. THIS VIEW OF THE
ORIGIN OF THE CONSTITUTION,
in the mostexpressjvianner:
RECOGNIZES IT AS ‘A COMPACT,’
AND A COMPACT DERIVING ITS
BIN DING AUTHORITY,FROM THE
RATIFICATION OF THE PEOPII-E
OF EACH STATE RESPECTIVE
LY, GIVEN IN THEIR SOVER
EIGN CAPACITY THROUGH
CONVENTIONS.”
These details hate led me away from’
the topic I had proposed to discus in this
number, —and as your Excellency's cu
riosity is doubtless “on tiptoe,” 16 hear
something of the sober North’s patriotic
submission to the behest ot the Union,—
it best beseems the exigencies of the cor
respondence, that I should give yoiit Ex
cellency an inkling of the North’s doings
aforetime, —before raising the veil from
the accouchment of that Giant embyo, —
the Union, —which has now clutched the
club of Hercules, to make war upon the
mothers who bore it!
RANDOLPH OF ROANOKE.
