Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

<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-'