Newspaper Page Text
<05*orflta
Gold and £and Lotteries.
GOLD LOTTERY
Prizes, drawn nj* to March 2.
Hibb—John Harris orps 1l>87 12 1; ZB Wade
436 3 4; Win Ulan a-T 732 21 3; L Phillips 7j5 2
3; Itoht Colliiu 998 3 2; D J Juatico 186 2 3;
Jns Pfidget 3 3; L D Feavy 5/34 3; Robert
Johnson 6^0 2 1; Georg* W Ellis 394 2 2; A P
Patrick 299 15 2; Thos T House 937 19 3; J T
Barnes orp CIO 2 1; Baldwin Flukcr-i o';'$ J72
17 3; Timothy Matthews 37 3 1: ’^.ivid Lovett
629 lb 2; John I) Collins *>99 lsainli James
26C 14 1; J (I Carter 183; lliram Vines519
17 3; J Ashbury JflO.i 14 1; J AlassengaleffiS 18
2; Danl Vale- * j0 37 2 3; L Atkinson 1076 2 1;
Jns Henderson 1030 19 3; John Wilton 1126 14
4’ David Turuer 530 15 2; Win P Hunter 811 2
2; Win B Jordan 697 1 2; Martha Pauon w 1226
2 1; JohnS Childers 675 183; Caleb tiinilh 776
3 1; T Powel! 28418 3; R Bivins 46121 2; Josi-
ah Stovall 92216 2; Robort Patton orp 31117 5,
Win 'P Smith 30 II 1; Chns II Rice of Houston.
ton Clemments 212 4 3; I R Middlebrooks 438
1
.. oo-y.-v V 93618 3; Car
oliue Moy orp 89/ 17 Stun! Deloach 422 3 2;
I 2 ® 21 - y : »•--« Ives 1193 23; John
i • d; D §inglctnry 843 4 3; E Jones
®IIx; M Williams G74 11 1.
Hut In—M Holloway 1071 21 3; John Jones 101
5 4; Allen Gray 434 11 1; E <111161 343 21 2; J
M M-I.cmlon 260 18 2; Jas M Carmichael 816
18 2; Win Stroud 483 21 4; J B Marablo 813 18
2; John Stephens 245 5 1; Basil Loivc 649 IS 3;
.Kit-lid Parker61 18 2; Geo K Byars 427 13 1;
Josiah Draper 93 1 2; G llcndrick 804 19 3; B
Bridges355 13 1; Jas Kiug594 20 3: A Groce
379 1 3; R E Knight 711 4 3; Gales Jinks 1333
14 1.
Campbell—Robt M Vilvain 40 14 1; Wm Mor
ris. 709 16 2; J D Buffington 1124 11 1} Win
Dunn 1161 21 3; Josiah Camp31 1 1; D B Bur-
son 348 162; Jns Ward 834 5 1; A Parker 460 2
4; 11 Wilkins 320 1 2; Thos J Rogers 493 18 2;
Jas Rice sr 979 2 1; Win Williams 100 13 2; J
-Martin 8012 1: Sntnf Waits 16 2 4; J Swain w
677183; J F Findley 402 11; 31 Unfncy 878 3
4; U C Hickman 1227 4 3; Jas Davis 349 3 4;
Jns SPriddy 199 5 1; P Prichard 1064 13 3; S
Buffington w 1083 18 8; S Strickland sr 339 13
In; I M*D6wcll 913 18 3. , , _>
Coiwfa—John Gaddis 210 4 1; L Dunn 376 2
4; Thos C Moore 1263 2 3; Geo Watson 927 19
■•3; Edwd Slcdliam 935 21 3; Sami Millar 1IU9
21 2; Rich B Wooten 613 2 2; J E Conyers 686
J 3; G Holmes 40 5 1; N S Chiles 416 21 3;
Reuben Ball 12920 3; Hannah Germany w323
18 2; Joliu Gilchrist 70014 1; A O M* Whorter
49123; Jos Smith 100 5 1: Sami M Shipp 438
4 3; Woi Davis 236 1 3; Win A Willis 766 19 2;
Robt Brook 218 22; Wm Siewnft 443 3 4;. Geo
W M’Gray 951 3 3; Mary Mclson w 724 18 3;
Georgo Minick 536 4 1; John Stamps 862 3 2; E
Pritchett 317 17 2; Amos Brow n 154 3 2; Jas T
Allen 851 23; W Sumerliu 8263 2; J B Gordon
380 24; D Robinson 1113 14 L
Crawford—Jonas W May 95 1 1; Win John
son 1242 16 2; F Whatley 571 19 2; L Stanford
113 1; Wm T Brown 616 172; Allen Fetts 802
34; Wm J Waynman541 33; P Benton 444 4 1;
Alary Smith w 501 183; J M -Stanford 1126 2 1;
James S Leo 833 19 3; ’> B Robertson 433 162;
Win Wiseman 6i61 4; J C Harvey 1147 11 1;
E Allen 930 12 1; Silby Davis w 934 18 3; Wm
B Files 1126 15 2; John Benton 1036 20 3; Jos
Market 1073 18 3; Patrick Sawyer 1071 4 1; Jif
Seiglar891 18 3; Jas M‘Murray 286 1 4; Aden
Little 60 182; John P Glover 1149 5 1; Robert
Howe 568 13 In: Georgo Hnhersham 262 17 2;
Thos S Estes 774 16 2; Daniel Hamilton 16219
D
Fayette—John Quick 910 15 2; Wm Millsap
927 1 4; Thos Lloyd 78 103; Wm Shaver 463 4
3; David D Minims 1143 3 8; B Boalt 980 3 1;
A Roberts 10303 1; JolinG Smilicl73 3 2; Wm
Shoemaker 1119 4 1; Uriah Glass 61 4 3; James
Randol 425 2 2; John Port 12217 4; Cannon
Al-lviii 619 12 1; Win Ivey 809 3 3; II Ogletrec
1105 19 3; D B Head 846 1 2; Thos Mercer G53
IS 3: Wm L Breed 930 3 4; John M Faulker
1233 15 2; Sninl Rhodes 918 3 2; Geo W IMul-
koy 622 203; Wm Watts 704 111; David Vann
Jcsso Jones 863 3 4, S D King 1204 17 3; Cliai?
Hulsey 61833; John Mathis 109 17 3; Harrison
Fuller 566 1 3; Hanson Walker 234 1 1; B P
Smith 203 1 1; R Shuffield 87 4 1: .Mary Mat
thews orps 634 4 1; Thos Davis 140 4 1; Richd
Mathcs 50321 3; A Dorman 1029 2 2; James j
Ryle 397 5 1; A J Alexander 64 2C3; Wm Car
rington 1086 17 2; Wm Wesson 875 17 2; Thos
CnrterC56 1 3; John Liles 43111; John Andress
1230 20 3; Wiu Haiston3G7 17 3; Howell Mose
ley 221 21 3; Robt B Watts 1144 15 2; John
Watson 677 20 3; Joliu S Head 4991 i; John
11 Thomas 6704 1.
Henry-S R Phillips 138 14 1; Aaron Cloud
237 19 2; David Adams 5512 1 4; Jas A Edwards
2/4 20 3; John Gray 151 21 3; Thos J Null 829
-1 3: Jas II Edwards 1200 2 3; B 8 Osborn 1023
6 I; Aaron Komp 797 2 3: Wm Gray 1150 8 4;
O Sniden 34211 1; J II Hoddege 278 3 2; M J
Burk alow 160 172; Arch Luster 475 20 3; Enos
Barnes 729 21; Jos Cagle 521 2 2; Bcnj Lan
ding 801 3 4; L Cagle 783 15 2; Jas Nix b f542
14 1; Roht Meek 1269 14 1; J W Brown 429 13
1; riion Fields 197 5 1; David Lewis 796 21 2;
Chav Wilder 593 31; Thus W King 71033; Win
Dunn 290 12 1; Joint Ellis 156 13 1; Seaborn
M Camp 318 16 2; Geo Reynolds 442 21 2; C
Maddox 63-3 15 2; Win Johuson 4133 1; Bur-
well Camp 332 3 1; Eaton Driver 293 4 1; John
Freeman 411 121; Alex Caldwell 1205 4 1: EM
K M'Cutchcn 361 19 3; Wm Stewart h f624 19
2; Win L Clayton 81711 1; J J Hood 276 16 4;
B Massy h f 632 19 3: Eliz Thompson w 12 2 2;
Zat-h I>*>"• 140 5 1; (>’-.-o W Rowan 707 16 2; !!
Mitchell 223 19 3: II Capps 819 16 2; Sainl Mc
Clendon h fJUOl 18 2; lohn T Lambert h f608
J 3; Wm While hf 43 14 Jas F Bentley IJJ5
12 1- Jeremiah Lnmheri273 19 3; D .\ Williams
‘1175 33; Zacli Kitchens 76 21 2; LK Thomas
131 I 1; James Tompson lll4 2 3; Jas Saxon
•37 183; Bcnj Barfield 470 17 2; A B Faith w
1793 1: John Wilson orp 718 4 3; James Sowell
750 19 3; James Cook 65-1 21 3; H IlStrith 759
J8 2; John Phifer787 2 3: Bcnj Sansing 1203 19
2: Roht Rowan sr 626 2 2; Aaron Kemp 62
19 2.
Houston—Nimrod Jackson 621 1 3; Needham
12 1; Wm Roberts 7Cl 121; David Lester 340
4; J Watson 7522 4; Eliz Farmer w 1236 2
R P Bailey 728 19 3; Letisha Ci>lVf219 3 1;
Daixl 453 14 1; E 11 Moores orps G/6 2 3; Lev
Alulleos 1016 18 3; Wm T Lightfoot 934 17 3.
E F Smith 324 18 3; iV ^ Childs 179 5 I, Mark
Patterson 8543JF jas George 1189 19 3; Obev
I homss 73232; p A Lewis 1180 11 I; Malach'
Watts 3801 4 ; L Bedding field 5162 2; Newton
44 3 4; Jas Miller 1278 15 2: Win Mitchell
439 1 3; N W Gordon 377 11 1; Jas Lnrajir 300
3 3; Geo G F Mitchell 577 5 1; .Wm S Middle
brook 42-1 18 3- Collett King656 17 3; J God
ard90121; Felix Murphey 96 15 1; Dolly Pat
tersou w 870 19 2; F L Benton 4u8 4 1; Benj
Herndon 799 3 1; Joseph C Stiles 327 15 2;
riah Porter S24 2J 2;*U Davison 1016 16 2;
Moore 81718 2; S Owens74*' 1 2: Wm Cox 437
162; Na^cy Hogars w 1144 22; Alex Johnsons
m-p'£373; Green Miller 11192 4; Anan Wil
’.is 121? 12 1; John Watts 322 12 1; Timothy
.'.1‘Pbcrsou 1259 15 2; G Pope 1276 3 1, Har
rington Blow 34 18 3; Daniel Ilysler 3*30 2 1; R
D Martin 3 3 3; Robert Pickett 59 15 2; Elbert
Hutchins 61531.
Monroe—SH Marlin 794 5.1; NancyBucker
w of Talbot 951 17 2; T Dclamars or.ps 7o7 3 1;
Clary Richardson w4l^L2 3,. N Ouslev823 5 1:
Chas YCaldwell231213; Jas Wildou 1291152:
Win II Lindsey 12G4 3 3; Chas Stewart 1140 12
I; N Ferguson 681 2 3; John Chambles 332 1 4;
John Mullen 370 2 4; R T Porter 639 2 3; John
S B Low 744 2 3; AT Turner 1218 3 3; John
Ferguson 23 13 1; M D Hcncgan 1/4 19 2; Jas
Davidson 967 18 2; Thos M Iliirrnp9553 2: Jos
Boler jr 816 17 1; M Mc£rUt?95 131; Roht F
Sinclairs orps 341 182; Jplm Cobper. 743 3. 1; 1
Wiler 59 2 2; !\1 Chewningw852 18£; Thomas
Blair 704 16 2; Ja« White 877 14 1; J03 Jolley
U21S3: Wm Tucker 321 2 4; Jane Woodall
orp 126 3 4; ^nii Pyc w 1117 2 2; Edw F Ev
ans 1159 19 2; Jas S Bonner 10^7 ~
Begurley 990.18 2: tycjfj P.Cjdnue.r
C Whatley 7-1161} Sarah .Wqodafd
J Shropshire 621 19 2; Win M‘NaI-608 2 l 3; J
B Matthews 921 141; JasBcckcom 182 152; Jas
D Bcckcoin 376 I 3; Jonathan Rutland 1207 3 1;
M Ivey 496 16 2; Hugh Rees 195 1 4; JnoTole-
son 113 19 3; L G Smith 151 19 3; Jno Mitchell
3|232 3; Wm Phelps 1267 192; Wilmoth Rogers
w 344 5 I; Tilman llaivk 2pi 21 3; Win Craw
ford 716 4 3; IleVerlv Martin orp 12 13 1; Richd
FuUou 180 3.3; Eli H Walker 720 3 4; W
Stalling 419 2 3; Jas M Putnam 459 2 3; Ste
phen H Duke 1220 17 3; Presley Smith 742 3 2;
Wm II Ezell 575 17 3; John F Foreman 964 «1
2; Ichnbud Ilmlmau 300 21 2: Joel Gammon
160 3 2; Wn Kirksey922 19 2; James Pinekard
1851 3; R R Morgan 11032 I ~~ “ f
W Bozeman 439 2 3; Wm A Johnson 3024 1; J
‘ 1125212;
IV G Gordon 112521 2; Joliu Hardy 8162 3; J
Modcss’ett 9212; J Shocklev99G5 1; Wm Dar
di.i 393 2 4; W r m Smnrr 1075 19 3.
Pike—Benj Moody 735 17 2; Wm SIniptrine
75 4 1; Sami Lane 614 1 4; S It Bullard 110 2
1; Dempicy Butler 263 2 2; Wm O Oliver 498
11 1; Wm W Williams 291 14 1; Wm C Gcr
many 276 172; John Hutchison 187 3 3; Hudson
Kirk 1165 18 3; Joel Callaway 1032 18 3; Ste
phen J Brown 848 4 1; Laurence Kirk 802 173;
W r in Heggason 117332; Benj M Milner !2<9 20
3; Rhfit Murphey-1322 19 2; II J J VVilkersou
II? 14:- Joslfd'a Bradley 850 3 3;' Martin Sim
mons 366 1 1; Philip Jackson 305 20 3; Jas II
Christain58918 2; 5Vm.ll Simmons 84 12 1; G
Clements 144 17 3; Matthew Orr I01G 19 3; C
C Moore 46919 2; A Wadsworth 43 102.
CONGHESSZONA1.
Correspondence of the Charleston Courier.
. :• « Tuesday Feb. 26.
•-.* Mr. Calhoun's lieso/utions.
The Senate then proceeded to consider the
resolutions offered some time since bv Mr. Cal
houn. .• ■>
After the. resolutions had been read—
Mr. Calhoun then took the iloor. He ad-
land, ts at the same time a compact. He re-1 be a mere nullity but for this restrictive power,
iniuded the Senator tbatat tiie assembly oft!
Barons who forced .Magna Charta on King
John, before the assembly broke up, that the
instrument assumed the torm ol a covenant.
He instanced also the departure of James the
Second, and the course of that event to sustain
the same view. .lie then instanced the ratifi
cations of the.* Constitution by Massachusetts
and Ncw-Hampshire, to show by the language
therein, that this Constituion was ratified as a
compact. He also referred to the resolutions
of the legislature of Virginia of 1798, to show
that the same construction was there given to
that instrument. It had been contended that a
compact could not be a government, because a
government possessed powers to carry' its pur
poses into efieet. It was true that a .compact
and a government could not be the sanie, but
tile Senator misuriderstood the position which
ho (Mr. C.) had advanced,-wliicb was, that-the
Constitution was a compact, not the govern
ment a compact. The whole of the attacks
which the Senator had made on the idea that
our Constitution was a compact, had failed.
It was a compact formed by. the States;—
This sceined to be acknowledged by the Sen
ator from Massachusetts, although he hud made
no such admission in liis speech three years a-
go.- Ho congratulated himself on the progress
which,truth had made iii thus converting the
Senator from Massachusetts to' the doctrine of
State Rights. The language whicb t had been
* relied on—“Wef the; people;” was cot the lun-
guaged used under thin Constitution, but was
the language adopted under the old Confedera
tion, and only shewed that there was a consoli
dation of the States at that time, but shewed
nothing of the kind under the present system.
The term used in tho. Constitution ‘.‘binding be
tween the people,” is proof that tho instrument
is viewed as a compact. It was not regarded
as a law, because laws bind over, on a people,
but not between a people.
He believed that he had made out his three
positions that this Constitution is a compact—a
compact made by the people of the States—
and a compact ratified by the States acting in
their sovereign capacities.
Mr. C. said that lie was at a loss to understand
the argument that tho Constitution ceased to
be a compact when it became a Constitution.
Win B M‘Kel- He denied the possibility ff a compact losing
its elementary cliai acter at any time. What
was once a fact, must ever continue to be a
fact; and the continuance of the compact is
proved by the reservation of tho power to
change its character whenever the people think
proper.
He then went on to shew t/rat this Govern
ment ^federal in its character; and that it is
not national or consolidated. He expressed
particular surprise that the Senator from Vir
ginia, (Mr. Rives,) should have taken the ground
on which he places his argument that this is a
consolidated government.
The corollary front those propositions is, that j
allegiance is due to th6 States. A State by its j
When tiie States are admitted t - possess this ve
to power, this right of judgment, then it must
be admitted that nullification has its origin in
our constitution. If the States had tho right ot
deciding on the mode of resistance wheu their
rights were assailed, they possessed the right el
nullification; Th right ol‘ secession also, lie
contended to be the right of a State, which
could not be denied- . The doctrine of consol
idation, he stated, was for the fiist time brought
forward in the celebrated case of.M’Culloch,
but it was thon wrapped up in certan ambiguous
phrases. The first open avowal of it was made
m the proclamation of the President ot the U.
States. If the doctrines, of the other side, were
to prevail, we should have peace, but it would
be‘ ibe peace of death; and who.wyuld.not pre
fer the disturbed trtuitjuillity of confederated
Mates, to tiic dead calm of despotism? He
drew a comparison of the condition of those
Nations which had been establish' d on a basis
of freedom and representation, and those which
looked to perfect and.arbitrary power, in order
to show how the.former had increased in pros
perity, glory, and renown, while the latter had
dwindled; degenerated, and decayed..
lie proceeded to show the futility of the ar
guments by whjcli his positions had been as
sailed in reference to the strength: pj’ the fede
rative system. He adverted to the presence of
the veto power in the Roman Republic, and to
the felicitous influence which it exercised on
the destinies Of that great People. The case
of Poland quoted as tho only one where this
written constitution, the lowest Judiciary Court
had a right to express an opinion as to the con
stitutionality of a law of the legislature. He
referred to the appellate power ol the Court
as the most important. All the Courts have a
right .to judge for thetnselves; were it not that
they itad given up that right to the Common
government: . .
The Senator from South Carolina had said
that he was dn the side of liberty, and that he
(Mr. W.) was on the side of power. If he (Mr.
W.) were to say that he was on the side of lib
erty, and the gentlemen on the side of power,
it would not be more inaccessible 6i prool than
theothcr. He thought that he was on the side
oflibarty;and ho thought that the gentleman
from So.uth Carajina was on (he side ol power,
for he stood iip ier the power of minority to rule
a majority, for the dangerous power ol setting
up the vote of a single State to say to all the
other States, take tkelaw from our mouth. Il
this was a mere league between sovereign States
it could not be broken, and there was no ap
peal but tp the sword. In Reference to the par
ticular population of the South, no Northern
gcptleman desired to produce any evil.
Mr. Calhoun said-lie believed that there was
no intentiofl in the North to disturb tlijs prop
erty, but such was the inevitable current of
things.' v . -.
Mr. Webster referred to the influence of that
property on the representation of the South ia
Congress, and statefl.that with the exception of
some fanatics and visionaries, the feeling on
this-subject in the North was presiscly what
which was now in the other House, and on the
course of conduct on (he part of South Caroli
na which had rendered it necessary to pass
that bill. JSoulh Carolina had declared her de
termination to resist the execution of the laws,
and the only question was, whether the Gener
al Government possessed the'power to enforce
their execution. He stated that the argument
of the Senate 1 ? from South Carolina resolved
itself into this, that where sovereignty had, once
sovereignty, may violate a compact, but cannot
violate laws. He srrid nothing, as to the moral
right, but merelyjhe constitutional right of do
ing so. If a State violates her compact,’ the
only course to be pursued against^ her is war.
Ho characterizes the bill how before .flip House
as a bill of bjobd and massacre, a bill which is
disgraceful to the eye.
It was perfectly competent for a sovefeignty
to.act oh the individuals' of.a State, without de
stroying the federal, character of the Union,
This was authorized by .the ratificatioh-by th
States of the Constitution,'as binding between
the States,’and acting on the individuals of the
States. Ifhis views wore correct, they would
principle of freedom had not been able to prer the Senator and his friends' could want. -
serve a Nation from destruction. The princi- ~
pic of representation was not a new one, but
bad existed from early’periods; s He repudiated
the idea which \vas so favorite A one with the
Senator from Massachusetts, of a Government
founded on a representation of one common
voice. If he were to bring that principle into
operation in hostility to the States, he would
provoke a, spirit which it would he difficult to
brjeak down. The present struggle is a great
one, it is between liberty and power. If t5e
bill which is now before the House should pass,
it must break down the powers of the Staies.
He declared that he would rather take the Ta
riff than see that bill pass, wlflcli would be so
dangerous a precedent w’liencver the .President
should feel disposed to .arm himself against the
State sovereignties. He gave the Seuator full
cred:. for bis great talents, but he,was unable to
stagger under the weight of the cause which he
had to support: and concluded with a reference
to ‘lie consequence which was likely to ensue
to the Southern States from the peculiar char
acter of their population, and the interference
with it by the North.
Mr. Webster then commenced bis reply.by a
disclaimer of any feeling of unkindness towards
thp Senator from South Carolina. They had
entered public life, both young men, ardent
aud zealous, some twenty years ago, when they
had arranged themselves on opposite sjdes.
Mr. Calhoun explained, that he had desired
w hich he placed himself lie felt It liis dutv
offer an amendment to the bill. He did' 0
believe it could endanger its passage, atu | ^
appeared to him to be so essential as to demand
attention. It was a provisioh, that thcrulji-
w hich the- graduation of duties .alia? Ix> jjjol
shall be “the Annual Report of tlio State ••
Commcr.cc and Navigation for the last yea r ^
He reads a letter which he said waa fcj m ‘
highly respectable commercial corj-hspondemof
New York, which expressed not only the same-
ideas but the identical words which h e
himself made use of on a former occasion, w j, c
speaking on this subject. He was aware th»
it would be objected that this amendment could
be passed at an early day in the next session
ol Congress; but he was unwilling to trusttj
such precarious expectations.
Mr. Clay said, that it was with extreme re.
gret that 1-e rose to oppose the amendment
offered by his friend from New Jersey. 1J C
would be gratified ifhe could see the possibility
of incorporating any amcndmennit with the
bill at the session of Congress, without endan
gering its passage. He did not, however, he.
lieve the amendment of the Senator at all e 5 .
sential to the object intended. He urged the
necessity of immediate action upon the hi!!
both from the shortness of time left of the ses
sion, and the multiplicity of business before the
other branch of the Legislature. lie believed
the objections to the bill to bo founded in mis
take; and if the Secretary’ of the Treasure, (n?
lie believed he could,) would take up the act
in the spirit in which it was framed, no ditficul.
ty could arise, and no amendment woulj. be
Mr. Sprague made some remarks ori the bill j necessary. He said he should ask for the ayes
which had been passed .by' the Senate, and and noes.
Mr. YV ebster—Although he believed this,
arnhscveral amendments were desirable, ex
pressed a wish that his friend from New Jersey.
(Mr. Dickerson) would withdraw it.
Mr. Smith said, he did not rise to speak on
the amendment, but he gave notice that lie
should tomorrow move to lay this bill upon
the tabic until the Enforcing Bill should have
passed tiie other branch of Congress.
Mr. Dickerson gave the reasons why ho
resided in a people, they had not the power to j deemed it his duty to persist in having the
verted to allusions made by the Senator from
Massachusetts, which he deemed personal to j he fetal to'jtfie Bill which had passed tiie Scn-
himsclf. lie'had given no provocation for’ this ate,'were it npt that they came too late for that
Massy 195 16 2; S Dupree 899 17 2; Perry Hill
2732 3; Baptist Scott 792 18 2; Thos Sorrells
attack; and he was at a loss to account for the
motives which had induced the Senator from
Massachusetts to give a personal bearing to his
observations.’ Jf.thc Stenator intended any
thing personally unkind, [Mr. Webster—Cer
tainly notj ho would not pursue it. Ifhe meant
to advocate his cause by tills course of attack,
he must bo aware, that lie only betrayed the
weakness of that ,c?msq by a resort to such
weapon^.. Another motive might be attributed
to the, Senator from Massachusetts, although,
ho (Mr. C.) would not impute it; and that was
a desire to propitiate a high quarter, to which
a more grateful offering could not bo made than
the immolation of the individual who now ad
dressed the Senate. Mr. C. then adverted to
the charge made againsthimsglfl’of inconsisten
cy, and stated that he should always bo ready
to defend his own consistency, or to compare it
with tha) of the Senator fremr Massachusetts,
whenevc.r a, proper time slrould" .arrive. He
then gave a brief history of the^debaje which
had taken place on the bill , now before the
oth r House, in reference to7the.remarks made
,by the .Senator from Massachusetts on his (Mr.
C’s) language, exception had been taken to liis
Treatment of the Constitution as an adjective,
instead of a noun substantive, and to his use of
the word “accede.” He quoted the. authority
of the Senator himself for the first, and the au
thority of Jefferson and Washington to justify
the last. JUe would amend his resolutions by
striking out the words which he had found in the
language of the Senator himselfi
Ho then defended his own view of the word
"compact,” against which the Senator Itad di
rected so trcnienduous' a lire' of argument, in
genious and well directed; but this’ fire had
not so completely demolished him (Mr. C.) as
the French artillery had demolished the citadel
of Antwerp/ Not a rock had been displaced,
not a splinter was exhibited. He then read
*3; Euoch Fagan 17028; John V Brown 655 21 j there was ambiguity and looseness exhibited
3; Jos Baron1461 4; Richd M Beavers 351 18 I therein. II did not attribute these defects to
J3; Leroy Mims 6841 2; Riggers Singleton 170 any waftt of ability in that Senator. On the
'19 2; Burnell Alman 510 133; Benj Creamer contrary iiis mind was ofa high order, perfectly
12GO It 1; WmJClark548 162; II J._I'hon*jls trained in the use of words, and admirably
883 173; F W Johnson39 1 .’22; Robt Withcriog-
lon 12-0 1.9 2; Jesse Dennis orp 1-J066 4 1; Juh-
"t» Worthington 592 il; S Johnson 850 2 2; Jas
Parramote 242 164; Elisha Duffil 236 3 3; Asa
B Conk 11272 1; Ezekiel Bryan jr 8862 1; Al
fred W John 920 16 2; Hugh Lawson 489 3 4;
.John W Wynne 12?2 111; David Dunn 497 24;
J as GBaskin 11333 1; A H Campbell 92021 il;
M Dciironzeiiox 2220 3; John l.upo 170 2 2; D
31‘Loud on 7 12.
Jones—It BazcntoroGlO 11 1; Samuel Clny-
t.iu 13; 20 3; John \ iinou 1222 2 3; I ucy Dc-
Jnach iv 922 32; D IJadaway jr 415 21 3; Roht
V» •lokill u*’19 3; Jonathan Owctis 6834; Pcy-
qualified to give them their fullest weight. But
lie attributed them to the untenable ground
which lie occupied when lie made I liis attack,
on the r<.'soUukms which he (Mr. C.) had laid on
the tabic.
He then reviewed the argument on which the
Seuator from Massachusetts had endeavored
to overthrow the position that this government
is a compact, ilo disputed the proposition that
a Constitution, being the supreme law of the laud,
cou.d n. ; he a. compact; and insisted at •;
treaty, which is also the supremo law of tiie
purpose. But they could he applicable to fit
ture cases.
We have two governments; the one a gov
ernment of all the States’,’ and tho other the
government of the separate,Stptes, for the pur
pose of exercising their reserved powers. ’ lie
denied that one government ctjjlhl hqve the ex
elusive right of judgment of theso reserved
powers.—If one had this right,of judgment, so
lied (he other. He referred to fhe constitution
al provision, that laws made itr pursuance of
the Constitution, are the supreme law of the
land. Who is to decide whether these laws
are th • supreme law of tho land ? Tho Sonar
tor from .Massachusetts had claimed for Con
gress and the Supreme Court, the right.of judg
ment. But;why had noX the Bffcdntiye die
same right’?' 'i’lie'Executive, in certain cir
cumstances, will'bccome not only the interpre
ter of these laws, but the sole .and the armed
interpreter, and take away tiie resistance of
the States, and he will have nncontrolled.pow-
er in., hi;; _hands. And if Congress anil flic
Court, ami Executive, had .a right to interpret
the laws, why had not die Staff- Legislatures a
similar right to interpret them? The ratifica
tion of the State of Virginia shed an important
light _ upon, flits' point. There . the reserved
power is at the will and pleasure of the. State;
anil be insisted that the ratification was a part
of the Constitution of the United Stqtc-s.’ Vir
ginia proposed the tenth amcndrtientj and .Jiqr
reason was to he found in’Iier ratification oT the
Constitution.'> • . . ;
Hi; considered the argument of the Senator
from Massachusetts, that the Court was the ar
biter in the last resort, as very inconclusive;
and although Mr. Madison jn the Federalist,
had sustained that idea, Mr. Madison in the
resolutions of 1799, had advanced an opposite
doctrine. He j'reated lightly the authority of
Luther Martin, who was opposed to the Con-
stitntitfh. He considered the reserved Tmhts.of.
the States, as not reservaflons against'ai'-.y par
ticular' department,-but against the entire au
thority’ of the U. States. There was nothing
in the Constitution to justify any other conclu
sion. . The power to decide on the nature _of
these rights, was existing in the State Courts as
perfectly as the courts of the U. States.
Give to the Federal Government tde exclu
sive right of interpretation, and what becomes
ot all reserved rights. If you give the exclu
sive right of judgment, you give unlimited pow
er. Constant efforts were made, but all with
out success to get rid of the veto power of the
States. But the good sense of the Convention
defeated all these efforts, and the States retain
ed their sovereignties. The veto power had
•lot been voted down, and could not be put down,
and it was the great security of tho liberties of
thii country, Tiie Constitution woafd itself
to say, that all the. differences between them
had uniformly been generous differences, and
had hevqr disturbed their private friendship.'
Mr. Webster, admitting this to be.true, sta
ted, that lie felt deeper regret that thp. Senator
from South Carolina should have iihputefl. to
him a desire to win favor in a certain quar
ter.
Mr. Calhoun again explained, that he had
used very strong qualifications in his language,
and certainly had not imputed such motives
Mr. Webster went on to deny’ that he was ac
tuated by ruiy .pew-born zeal in favor of this
administration, or that lie had, in any way, al
tered liis views concerning, it. He then con
tinued his argument, by replying to the remarks
in reference to the terms “compact,” and “ac
cede,” and strengthening the original position
which he had taken in reference to'these terms,
He statcd.thfit the Senator from South Caroli
na had pursued his argument this morning, with
a total misapprehension throughout of his (Mr.
W’s) admissions. He denied that the Consti
tution was a compact framed by the States in
their sovereign capacities.' How Im'd it come
down to us 1 Had it come down jure divino, or
from the remote regious ol antiquity? Neither.
It had been created by the People, acting as
one people, desirous of forming one Govern
ment, aB0-ratifying tlf4 iCt>n6tituliod by their
own aci, reserving to the States, as govern
ments, such powers as had not been granted to
the General Government.' The Constitution
rests on a compact and agreement among the
People that they would make a common gov
ernment for common purposes, and was not it
self that compact. He referred-to the resolu
tion of the 'British Parliament on the despotism
of James IL'-in 1683, which had been quoted on
the other side, stated that .it had undergone
long and violent discussion before it was adop
ted, and that it declared the Constitution of
England^to be found9d oq a compact and not
toibu a compact. lie; agreed that the People
of the States canto into this compact as States,
and that no Suite could force into the compact
any.other State; but that all the People of all
the Stines had united to confer on tiie General
Government all the powers which, iiqd pot been
reserved to,thjg .Status. The ratifications of
Massachusetts and New Hampshire allude to
compacts among the People, and not between
the States. He stated that the general purport
of the resolution of Virginia was that the com
pact wap between flip People anil not between
the Stafesi He also commented upon the con
struction [Hit by-the, Senator from South Caro
lina, on the phrase, “Wo the people,” &c.
In reference to the power of the Supreme
Court as final interpreter, he saida few' Words
He .admitted- that -the reserved riglitj. of the
States were reservations equally' against every
Department of the Executive .Government.
He stated the' opinions he had expressed on
what was called the Bank Veto.
Ho considered the error of the Senator front
South Carolina to consist in his contemplating
tliis Government as one Government and
twenty-four States, instead of one Govern
ment and one State. He again referred to the
opinion of Mr. Madison, that a league and a
government were distinct, and tlrat the people
must take the ono or the other.
He stated that the convention which formed
the constitution, foreseeing the collisions which
would ensue, were very anxious to provide a
remedy, and to adopt some means for solving
tiie dificulties which should arise. Ho ad
mitted that in a free country, livino under a
transfer if, but that it remained among, them,
and could bejesumed at pleasure. He advert
ed to the origin of nations toudiew that tliis po
sition could not be.sustained. He considered
the,arguments -of the'Senator from South Car
olina,' hs abounding in dangerous and unsus
tainable propositions, infringing on the origin
al unalienable right of map. Ho insisted that
the bill which had been passed .by the Senate,
had received the rotes of its supjiorterson the
most conscientious- grounds. The piactical
nullification of Georgia produciaithe practical
and theoretical nullification ofSdfcth Carolina.
In reference to the contemptuous maimer in
which the Senator from Georgia had spoken of
the decision pf the Supreme Court, he express
ed regret that such language should have been
adopted, for he could assure the'gentlemen that
a very cliIll-rent feeling prevailed throughout
the country, and that it was generally held to
he one of the most glorious institutions which
liad ever peon reared: entitled to respect and
reverence for its intellect and wisdom. After
some beautiful and metaphysical descriptions
of the consequences which would result from
flic dissolution of the Union, lie again-repeated
that lie supported the bill because he dared not
peril the Union, and concluded with a splendid
peroration on the character and late of him who
should descend to after ages as tho destroyer of
this happy’--government.
Mr. Foyyth said, that ho regarded the Con
stitution a'; a surrender of power bv tho people
ou behalf ol their States t<? .the United States.
He presumed that the gentleman from South
Carolina, could not contest the right ofa peo
ple to surrender their sovereignty. By the
Constitution, flieyjjad surrendered their sove
reignty, with the simple exception of the’ equal
ity of representation in this House. He con
sidered that among tho powers which were
delegated to the United States, was the right
to determine the. mode and manner of .obtain
ing redress of grievances He also said a fo
question taken on his amendment.
Air. Clayton made a few observations, ant
the question was then taken and the amend
ment rejected without a division.
HOUSE OF REPRENTATIVES. ,
The bill further to provideJbr the collection
of duties on imports was taken up.
Mr. Verplanck said it was indispcnsible that
several appropriation bills he acted on in order
that they might he sent to the Senate within
the time prescribed by the rule—this was a
Senate bill, and might be acted on after hills
originating here must be sent to 'he Senate.
3Jr. Wickliffo .was willing to let the adnfirih-
tration take tliis hiTI instead of the appropriation
bills, if it was preferred.
' Mr. Bell trusted ‘the'bill before the House
would be proceeded in instead of spending an
other day in’discussing wlWhor it should Ik-
taken up. Ilo was anxious that die hill should
receive the fullest discussion possible, and that
no oflicl* riicasure should invade it until it iras
disposed of. The rules would be dispensed
with iiv flm House at the motion of the dai/-
man of the committee of Ways and Means, in
order to take up the appropriation Bills.
T ho question of postponement was further
discussed by Messrs. Sutherland, Wickfifle,
Dearborn, Adams, Verplam k, Wayne, Cam-
breleng and Hoffman; when Mr. 3I‘Dufiio
said ho should vote in’ favor of the motion to
postpone the bill.’ A bill which might be re
garded as the olive branch b id been passed I
and sent ftr the Senate—he would put it to the j
justice and magnanimity of the House whether
the olive branch should he followed by die sword
of blood/ There was no necess ty for this bill.
The other bill would he found to cnrrv healing
efficacy with it. If any tiling could convert it
into a curse, it would bo the present bill.
Mr. Blair of South Carolina, said his col
league had expressed an opinion that the Tariff ’
b 11 which had been sent to flic Sens e was the i
wosdsrin replv to the assertionbof the Senator ? livo bra ™‘ h "f peace—that might l o his opin-
from South Carolina, tint tho General Gov- ! ,on as an incFvidua!. It was not in ti e power
eminent could not give a guarantee
State, in her' present Condition.
Mr. f orsyth moved to lay the resolutions on
the table.
Mr. Calhoun said he wished the gentleman
frrom Tennessee would withdraw his ametnd-
ment, and suffer a vote to be taken on his res
olutions.
Mr. Grundy said he would like to have a
ote also on his amendment.
Mr. Calhoun said, that he would (hen accede
fo the proposition to lay the resolutions oh the
table?; • .
Mr. Webster asked if the gentleman from
South Carolina intended to call up these res
olutions again.
Mr. Calhoun said, he would not call them up
again
to that 1 r / t,,at or any other gentleman hern to express
the sentimon's of the Convetion of South Car
olina, which-had solemnly declared, that un'ess
the whole protective svstem he overthrown, the
the revenue laWs should not be executod. The
House had no right to presume that the Con
vention would recall this declaration in conse
quence of the passage of a bill which contained
protection throughout all its provisions. 1'a-
dor the present laws of South Carolina, could
(lie Tnrifi law lie executed unless the presedt
bill was passed ? Gentlemen could judge wheth
er the measure was not necessary for the pro-
rertm'n of the friends of the Union in that State.
For himself, he was indifferent on the subject;
but it should be remembered,'that unless some 1
effectual measures were adopted, a largepartol
the population of South Carolina were exposed
wore ex,
On motion of Mr. Forsyth, the resolutions > confiscation aud punishment for paying obe
were then laid on tlm table. J dience to your laws.
The Tariff. ^ r ‘ ® ean hdcv said, the tariff bill which had
Wi rvn r , „ * , I been sent to the Senate, was based upon (lie
r >i ' t?i rr', 10 Ho , use , to mod,fv thc nct j act of (he 14th July, 1832! This law had been
of theI4th of July, and other acts imposing j prostrated by tlm sov
dirties on imports, was read a first time, and
ordered to a second reading.
The Bill of tho Senate on ihe same subject
was thon laid on the table.
The Senate then adjourned.
Wednesday, Feb. 27.
IN senate!
The Tariff.
9 he b-ll from the House of RoDrosentativos -
“to modify the act of 1832,-anfl all other arts
imposing duties on imports,” was read a se
cond time.
Mr. Clay stated,' 'that in the present stage of
the session, he believed no amendment would
be offered to the bilk D was ,nnt liis intention,
however, fo press a bill which, seemed to be
so favorably accepted bv thc Senate, and he
supposed that it would bo proper that it should
have its final reading tomorrow.
Mr. Grtindv asked wb°fhor the Senator
fr>am K-ntuckv. [Mr. C9nv,] had examined the
bill and found it the same, in all its parts, as
flip OTiP Jtprnf aC?»»/\ it _
the ane , -erptofore before the senate.
Mr. Oav replied that be bad examined it.
an * fottnd it essenM-iUv the same.
IV ith * as Onjn.Jv said be was safisfiert.
Mr. D’ekerson then rose, and said that how-
e\er unpleasant might be the situation in
reignty of South Caro
lina. Was any gentleman authorized in behalf
of the sovereignty of the State, to assure the
House that the 12,000 men which had been
organized in’ resistance to the act of 1832,
would now be disbanded and the conrts ol
justice- opened to the im pa rial decision of ca
ses arising under it? If any gentleman was
so authorized, he desired it to be understood.
Mr. Clavton said the gentleman asked more
•ban was reasonable. H» had no hesitation in
saving that the bill which had been’sent to the
Senate would give peace and quietness to the
whole South. It had rereived almost the u-
nanimous vote of the Representatives from
that quarter. Tf the measure of conciliation
was not received with the proper spirit, Con
gress could be immediately assembled, and the
necessary measures adopted. He moved to
lav the bill on the table—but withdrew th c
motion at the instance o r
Mr. Burges. who said it would not be sus
pected of him that be was a friend fo the present
Administration. He was a friend to the fairs
of the land, and, to ensure their execution, it
was essential that this bill should pass. D h*
-i -cessarv, before we provi To for obedience to
‘be laws, that we s’ o"Id be informed whether
8outh Carolina intends f.. r ther to rests! them ?
He was willing to a Imit that gentleman, intim-'