The New York Herald Newspaper, October 28, 1860, Page 2

NEW YORK HERALD, SUNDAY, OCTOBER 28, 1860. 2 . f the meeting, consisting of the fol- forcing trucfand correct views of the federal coa- | proposed argument in opposition to the doctrine of | commending, framing, adopting or ratifying the him to go for a “separation,” aad upoa fer pr carn ng beets. ¥ Ms stitution. And I will here remark that the South | & cunsolidated soversmeat, and in favor of State | federal contioatent®” me Bieber grounds than even Y&ncey has ever an- Messrs, W. B. Helm, W. W, Liddel, W. W. Caroling views of the federal coustitation ought to | sovereignty, I will ween the Intelligencer 7. Did not each and every one of the several and | avanced, viz: apon the mere of crimination Whit head, T. 8. Jones, Samaet Hart, J. H Davis, be regarded as the most orthodox, autheatic and | their own ‘statement of my prop widon, and wl | separee Mtates act iudepeodendy and separately | and recrimiuation? 5 . 3. PB. H Parmale, correct from the fact that spe did more towards | t) en condense my views in the of a series Of | i adopting and radfymg the federal constitwuon, ‘Aguin, in the year 1868, in the same United States ey roe Beane oo" "Ee Hassell aad = fruming that instrameat than any other State. | interrogatories propounded to that journal, or compact of silane “by which they agreed to | Seonte, dees not this cherished and honored Andrew Woods. Both the original drafts of that constitation were | My proposition waa thus stated by the Infel/i- | establish a central agen y or goverument at Wash- | “Union” candidate of the Inteligencer make this i for consultation made by Seath Carolina members of the conven- | gencer:— ‘Our intelligent correspondent sryucs | ingion? Avd did that frstumeut, agreement or | declarativa:— By iting revolutions, which were tion which framed that inswument, in May, 1737; fat the faye 7 rigut of withdrawing | compact have any validity or effect whatever in Whee the North shall, by say deliberate act, Unanimously adopted, viz: the first by that able civilian, Charles Puuckney, | from the parte Pe Or leage of Staits, | each of those separate States until exch had so | the our uf any fair aud juss aud ¢ il Whetrar, tbe soo ut okotias tn Peansylvania, Ohio, and the secoud by that most emivent statesman | necessarily results m the nature of all | adopted and reatied i? And did uot several of the | the benedte «f tae Unwo— 1 the Vato aa tacreawod ~Jobn Rutledge, who was chairman of the commit | copartaerubips, aad ‘a fortiori’ beloaga cwen- | bates (us Virginia, New York and Rhode Ialand) | 0b rately announce to tae Sout, tee which reported the constitation, ant whom I | tiully to sovereign copartuers; so that each partner | expresrly reserve the mht to secede or “‘rewerve | WOT Blas * “ates,"—thel sould BOD WO Loe Chief magirt wey of thy Uutoa, avew th ed opened yr —_ member — may ahd 4 ag eae one, as each had bar youn ir perce ion: et aiases Garerecen of the approval gist ey of tho Colo, ly, “inter p » Facile princeps."' These | to enter into , Union, league, or coin . Again, dows re- nd unairguires vcciarsiny wna UW" Peranect eal {WO distinguished ica were, beyond 4 doubt, the | pact" The editors then ‘proceed to say? The | quire ree fourths of the States to rauty umeud- | PAI? wee \ ign pees a enneed a. d structing of the righ aad — true ‘fathers of the ounstitation,” hotonly from their | question is pot whether a league or partuership of | ments to that instrument? Is it wot therefore in eco ennai = ve cont quality of toe dvutnorn states tu tne stor; aad eR having ae a the origioat re- | States, acting by a‘ power of Attorney called 3 wit pose st prying Cree nen ers of “ Ope oak tae ar party Whores, 10 viow of these tireatoued Ch goes, we port tuereon, but from their haviog been through- | constituiou,’ secessarily iaplies the resulting right | er States, with a population one-tweantieth of +" in their platform, , porvarce that ea perplsof tne Svat | out the debates which ensued by tur their abiest ch draw from tue ‘ageucy,’ | the whole, to detent aay proposed ameadtineut? more slaves Memes; and bes jal daaronargeny eloererye fr A Tignes and Nbertes | supporters; and I state this tuck eapeotall Fag xg edge Om ion fll ag Hetero uy pro ontire. eumasry. ayer | ender. lc Seward, wanoanced 1a sae cxmnvecs of U we an mens te purpose of correcting the strange error which has | i in fact such an‘ agoucy ’ as it is ansumed to be | collectivery do any one-act a6 = single budy,et hor ¢ Lanco! * the Behl of sutaac'alwar wot cod coorgy atinald | got ubrond that Mado did more than any other | by those who deduce from ita very uature dhe inin- | iy electing delexates to evovrations, oF ai-mbery Guinea te te iettaiaeloce te hae anch tw could never nat wth the Sothern Baten ms - y meniber ia frat the foderat consutation, where- ty ht reserved to each copartuer of oreak- | of Congress, or electors ancy, of say at jor m single day. ing m: no extoution @ proyr rope! pry eae oar | as the direct st was ‘the ease, from the very = hey oad at his wil! aud pleesare. We avay | other conocivable act, etther at this ime’ oe trong deem apiece aud Co go Cor this promised sepa- | in wach a sorvile doctrine of force in this confede- rights and iderrer Me Quaranwood tous In the constlia fact ow which he hea 80 Be peded Simwall, that the government fag we bre seiiocs of the very podem of our Bait “3 Fie peneees a non meen —_ * at 8 recy of avian fa sovereigu Btates, aw ‘i U Led ‘ates, it Was constan! ecu, t tu t pubstitati of the United States ys Bu, ay? we no', how cap o position assumed our thern: disdainful; re- WD ‘tecolved has we love the Uaionaa tt was mete by | careful notes und jouresl of the proceedings, which eae the anthority ofan agent acting for end (on by Baw ard Livingston ia ie sas By don aud , that treason can be comm » ject it as an unfounded heresy until the ge tindnc our fathers ta wvwwtir g the tederel consttutiva, Pas thet he hus published, and which labor precladéd the | tain .copartucrs’ uuder '@ power of attorucy,’ | by ail federalists) » goverameat of the solid poo- to into the true dednition of the word | sual be proved wy actual ¢: nee, and wo regare that U10n «@ Parigg Deeg mate (OF WWF 4¢ — Hoidiliry of bis taking much share in the debates, | and heuce we deny, in like manner, the ‘rights’ | pic of our couutry, the goverument of the people | $0 inqure, odin ew fatal and disms! desth blow struck to this Sanen, vennetane Gee SUNN, Ge OSS SO Oe See h x Hi d as cesuiting from such pretended *com- | of United America? treason?" Ix tt not (as laid down by ail our egal | giorions Union, which sad calamity ev atriot Ob-cliud aud erl'are +1 our Bretaren of the Norca, | OF the action of that Convention. He was nut even | assumed as cesulting fr 0 retent Cf ot Un . auth: rities, as well as ‘exicographers) the “ h . ly every pi Prat (ne terme cf tuae Uutou are seatea ta tae constita: | ® meaber of the framing committee, and in fact | pact of political associatioa,’ and in support of oar Did not the people of each State crea'e the cor- Of sllrgiance.trom eunjec! o ee Mnst fervently pray that the omnipotent and eter- tion of tbe Luited Stavee: that we vii! eiyaa oy, apuoid | did little or nothing towards tue actual framing of | opinions we shall proceed to establish tae following | poration or budy politic called the Stave, of which | Of allrglance te ple pe or Cn ary sove- | nal Ruler of universe will in mercy avert freas and mali tata it ws it is Mhereia formed; dus it ivenel! bo | the federal constitution, although hu bas been oue | propositions :— each of its civizens ia a corp rat #,. whilst the State Peal yi sagt ote er were po ond our bow prosperous and happy somey. Dervertes 10 uur restriction, @ i gow toreateved, we | of its ublest expounders in his famous report and | 1 That vhis is @ government of the people, ond oot | is an imaginary entity or boing? And in like mun- | Ine & league, jeusat of guverninent OSTINTAM. Todiava and otoer Nurtneru scales, | BLO thOrrasiug Byes KEL of the Pep) PAPLY, ano Ube Geriainsy, alauss, of the elmosiva within any such Union of force, If this de ia tru party “aunounced tothe | gy ailiance or union of affection, patriotiom, and matus! benefit (as it was surely intended vo be). then will it be ‘‘as strong as adsmant;"’ bat ft be indeed @ consolidated | then would it but too truly be ‘“‘a rope of A : Bok mnly Monee 1 te De aur daty as 1b te oUF anquee- lutions of 1798, in the Virginia Legislature. alone of tbe states ner did wut those States create the corporation, or | ®8¢8¢y) empowered to perform certain duties in tioned Mgt Wo ake aay tinue tuk may de eff oat 0 | “Will the courteots editors of the Jutatigencer al- fat powover true it may be (ascontended by “Jus | Uunion, called the United states, of which each Seetecian soceee ceeeeree wire. een ote wun SALE. Secure ty curreives aud our postority Whe bieGaluge Of | iow gn old friend and a patriotic Union man, ublast) thes Sovery eye, erory steane, every | Winte line distfuat corporater; hus forming an ali. | ives the w eiguity ty of @ Comes tub ons | 3 Resolved, mep, ib tbe preennt warming orimls, to forget past p iitt- An a herey 5 ’ . | scholar knows that © 80 ‘Btat- Cannes comait trom. citizen, or subject, to s soverrigu? And where ‘BOD EnTa dL tHaD DIN Ba(Oun ° i, remarks uader the capdun of “Utopian Politios ?"” br : - Does nut each State by ite Legislawre cnunse ite O © OF geri toe wan, ined a cot husreneld Ie asterminea opposition 1 | the simple question offered to Mr. Dougias, at | Muetevers) Mt ppvewe trom she ewarde of Blelwr? Yo 06 | to Genators, and this has bot each Htate (the | tberefure, oan there be an ether filngeance due by | vee ORNs ose One Witenes ney of the repaolt c Norfolk, was—Can this goverament (or “ Agence: fora | smallest and the largest.) an equal to the | OUF citizens except to own State? Aad ts 4 ag piling wf erpeellons arenes. Lincoln to | Here! Banton! ah Weacetne) anblag Te | eee eters Baten eee, gopunle Seo | ORE HEE St REame Glows ooed te teintamee ENO com of ull correct deus and correct | RaERY 208, ¢aLS—4 BARE QBANCE: GOOD bo. OB lee Ube Presaercy of tbe Cuiou, avewing aud atvooating 88 gyainst a sovereign State which chooses to with- | 9 Thut in the formation of tavounstitutine the govern: | tatives to the House, as vrdoned amongst tie | #azaage to of allegiance, tastead of obedi- cation, hedaen tive ox verwertial poi hich vaaores the Haw, and does actially withdraw from this copart. | mect relablishod uncer it wad uarestood at sno ums +0 | gevernl Ntstes, eccurding to the inhebitants of that | €DCe t governments, Inws, ur constitutions? Dows | trauire te the store We Bevants areane, between Twanty- ears ae one SU eee oe ot tae | nership of Staten? ln reply to this query, Mr. | be incomaose with tbe right of secrasiou ag Inoerug 12 | siyte und require to be tuhabttants of thet state | HOt the consutation itself declare that ‘this = adorn States, ie w Finke. t a wl ar i accruleg © auy member of the Vaio. onsttation and the laws made in pursuance there- Ri v FOR SALR~ CAPABLI of tia, «i wnely nd wo by | Doulas declared that this ageacy, or creature of | OF poole muy = in which they are so chosen’ Does not each | Consttal : EWERY FOR SALR- CAPABLE OF BREWING 308 Stee eomonce a atun, aad ft any Seg ta tg tie Sines, a Seree-tu-datte haak tain tae 00° ‘ oe women const Soration tay State appoint its electors of President, not | shall be the aan law si ry Vand" ped i Cr te ot > egrene ti omy, resuit iw the wy rbeow of oar justita | partnership one of its novereiga creators which has | (,! pee pees ee ou they | in proportion to its population, but ty ite then can allegiance jue toa law, power of ai oly ot ie Wasingin sree tons apd the uh) gation of ou people to am iatoleravle | g0 chosen to depart. lend petther couutecuuoe Ror support. ‘The editurs pro | representatives iu both houses of Congress, eget Sap ene nero anne aleurone p" grou FORGAL-DOING A T1RSY RATE RE vable , . This is the great point at issue, and the great test | Ged w aay —" Mure te Dowbere ound ups the fe of | whereby the vote of the »mall states is much ia- | % PP see Sod pees cyt S bee well sto~ked and question between whixs and democrats, as to the | cor rest charter any Glawe Intinatiog it w Ove ‘oom | creased over the proportion of the large oues? Are | ¢ 0 termini,” and a violation of all legitimate | Wadshed. Fur paruonare address W. @. 8. Tat tp the ernat of the encoess of the ra- AR ComPacs to Whird the Mates aro yar. Pee; and. be rrto ©, Hat our Trt alleginoce 18 to tie Atate Of Mis-iaeippt, and whatever ortlereace of opiote there DAY EXIst Detween oF, AW Ly Che Dewt mda prowwrwl yg rolure that when tha date OUF Fgh Bad IdEricn, we Das Oeoidre ae te thet . #0 will cheerfully aad toy: Bils stand by aco Hel udare 7 Reavived, Chat while wo believe that there oa be Dut ope ovieiweu to Heard & us, et se can Fy Dioa aay trie ily aire te eo heat made of fod sithoot say our brethrwa of & taut may 4 wm a epirit of erucilia 6 Aan tae Bane {Wo tbe mestureB We mAs Herwalter adopt, We ary tolla epced DY be DBtiMy OF EAMIty to ANF feilow elizeUus of the North; bit ee are g verued sully by toe coarictiva that our rigbus. our bo. or, aud te tulerests of aural ves Ano our Cb lar Db Mpereus!y demand that we should pot falter iv detending the privileges Seoured to as bY the Covetitutive; Hor dO we Hove oF eXpect to jutimitale oar Northern 91 (brew, end thus o-rse them to a rec guttiva of the Fghie woieh tney Loe dems; Oa the contra-y, we | believe that there are amy them May who aro wiliug to do us ful! justice, nud #e Bope Chat there are msoy Others nue acting with the republican party who, | if tbey ovulo per tho dapgers which surrouad us and throaten to woe weoouon uf the Caton wilt Prom tly come Lo the Compact mace betar and for Dis reason we to make une more ap peal through « ion to the Pease of jus- toe and rigot 0 provle for a clear constita- tional guaraptec # our rights Mefore tt phalt Gaatly be determined that #e can un lorger be bretbera. The meeting was aidressedh by Mosirs, J. 8. Jobmon, k. W. Wilamson, J. P. Scales, W. B. Helm and J. 2. George, and » lewer from Hon, E. 8. Fisher read by Col. D. RB. Kassell Wuereupon the meeting adjoarned. WILLIAM BOUTH, President. Sawern A. Newson | eo . B. W. Wirusamson, ; Secretaries. DOUGLAS AND LINCOLN, We are indetted to a gentieman of ugh character tn Warren country, for the following correspond- evce, containing a statemeut which we deeply regret, but which ear yy bod our readers requires wis, we are assnced, is 8 gentieman of avimpenchable veracity. He is a | us vo publish, Alfred E. nephew of ex-Chief Justice Lewis, of Pennsylva The language attributed to Judge Douglas is re orted to have been used to Mr. McPherson, a an member of Congress, and by him lack repub communicated to Mr. Lewis:— Pun apacrata, Joly 23 1860. Dean Are—Refeeting om the ta porsact bearing of tbe remark mace Oy Judge ogias to the Hon. Mr dal’acr- reas from this State, as ry statet by you, wo wy go to the Howe, be and seo w Forney's free an totimatiog to the tame efivet, 1 have ro Of Wh to Others, acd wuslog w 08 oment, YOu iil groatiy oblige me oy 8 ocariy 0a you cam, that were aaed by . aod, were as follows:— T go Ito the House—bote £0 ute the House, I 1s Comment on the foregoing, if true, ia unnecessa- Judge Douglas’ whole course, siave the Baltimore Reopen has been in epposition to any union of the democracy in order to defeat Lincola, He bas assaited Mr. | Breckinridge politicully in severe teruw—he bus | deciared that he would regard the election of Lin- | coln as a great calamity; but he has uttered no word nat Mr. Bell, and he has advised no union of the democratic forces to defeat Lincoln. Aad if Pherson and Mr. ry. We feel bound to say tha! the above statement of Mr. Lewis be true, he would tarow the elec In 7 ae. ol Tap retitatives.- Kaletgh Santar CAN THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT RIGHT PLLLY Go8KUE SECEDING bTa CBs! In the year 1820 General Hamilton, of soath Oa- rolipa, a to resign his seat in oer gress, avd having declined the appointment Secretary of War tendered to him by General Jacksou, in order to accept the Governorahip of | South Corofioa, brought with him to Charieston an old aad tat ered copy of the Virginia and Koa- tucky resolutions of (798 (by Madison aad Jeifer- son), which hed been presented to him by his fanhfel and devoted friend Raatolph of Roanoke, and which that stermaa of marvellous eloquence and extreordmary gewius declared to be the only his kouwledge and vetlel, Goveruur Hamilton, in hiv speeches in Isto, was the first stetesmea since "98 and "Y9 to rnnoware and advocate the Jelf.r- sonisn remerty of aullitiestion, aud then tor the | and every statesman, and every lawyer, first time brought to public notwe thuse famous State papers of Virgiuis and Kentacky. the pab- lic mind of the Suath am greatly “artivd ot ths appareatly new doctrine, apd ir. c im (to the certain know! re of ihe writer, & bre in law of Governor Hamilwn,) imme hately applied to tioveraor Usuileoa for a copy of that rare pamphlet, which the latter nad jast pubfished, in a new edition, fur dri bution among bw friends; and Mr. Carnoun | *hatever, but only delegated (or eutrasted) cer. | n +d Gis soverenge right of e Btates, of which he has igost erropenasly, been styled the fathet in Soa | CWrolins, whereas the neoor of that ttle belonged exclusively t» Gov. Hamilton, not omy as first in troducing and advucating it, bat as re ad ing, im his tft mewsage, ite enforcement, and th - aeembiing of a convention for that purpose; wl he succeeded in carrying throagh «y hia grea opularity and hia serene snd tufy courage, wut! nultified amencae system of ressive ta itt. ‘Wes abandoned hy the colebral Compromise OF the patriot Heery Olay. It was dariag the progres+ OF that famous st that the writer of the fuilow- fog remarks (in connection wieh bis noble he sted brother-in-law) ieeply studied the sabject of State Fights and the federal coustitution, aad wrote 4 octavo rulume on their just interpretation, of which the #abjoined tirief éseay (rms an epitome or aynopnis, Lewis Uncen, South Carvlina, That wa regard tne constitution of the | this copartuership under the j rable wrong; although sume democrats, like M 1g over 1M Miat hat | at faiebfaliy observe the | fatners and our fathers; | i bbrow it over to Lincola.”” the WOrGs (Due red wore accompanied by & violoat gostere, And perbape ac adu(sioual ona. Iam very wra'y, yours, ALFRED ELE on to Lia- | Kentucky 4 of ‘#3 and ‘. Fi A e Mr, Breckinridge elected by | example, wely declares (in the ‘4 tract) which ave quoted) that “this copy of that pwinphiet then extant, to the best of attorney, culled the corstivution, and the nature of the sovereign rights of the partner States either to nullify, within the Unuon, # clearly uaconstitutional act, or to withdraw by a Siate conventiva from that partuership, if they so elect, This is the taterpre tation pht upon those great State papers by every true democrat, whether the same be correct’ or not; ane ne man can he considered 4 trae demo- crat who holds the contrary doewi Bat, at the same time, the great body of the democratic party sre eutirely opposed to the exercise of this sovereign right except in cuses of the rffost into! Yancey and Mr. Rhett, have favored its exercise in cases of clear and flagrant violstions of the con- sticution (or power of at orney from the States), by their agency at Washington. JUSTINIAN, No, 2. Merars. Eprrors—If | may be allowed to tres- pass tor a brief space, 1 would offer a few sugges- tions in reply to your patriotic and conservative remarks, und te the authorities you have adduced against the sovereign and ultimate right of S.ate secesnion, This sovereign right of withdrawing from the co- partnership or league of States is not claimed as a constitutional right, or a recognized right withia the Union, but as a right necessarily reeurting from the uature of all copsrtuerships, and @ fortiori as esseatially belonging to sovereign copartners, 80 that encod partoer may have the saiue option ty with- draw as each had tw enter into the alliauce, union, league or con pact. And the let er of Mr. Madison, in 1530, in relation to the celeorated Virginia reso- lutions of 1708, perfectly and entirely coincides with these views; for he therein declares (a quoted in your article) that “the error in de late comments On the Virginia proceedings has arisen from a teilure to distinguish between resorts withia the purview of the constitudon and the ‘ultias appeals trom « constitation caavelled to original rights paramouut to all This is the precise and obvious ground upon which all true democrats have based the sovereiga rights of soverriga States, viz.: that they are nude- niubiy paramount to all constitu ious, confederation, or powers of attorney; and ve will quote Mr. Madison's own language in those famous resolutions of '¥8, which, together with Jeffersoa's, constitute the best interpretation of the conastii- tion by one of its own framers and founders:— This assembiy doth expticitiy and perempwrity seolare that it views the powers of Luc ‘onerat g »rernqment as re a from the compact to which the Mates ars par as limited by the plain sense and ivteution of the iLetrument constituting that compset; ee no further valid (bap they are sutporized Dy the g-ants enumerated iy that compact; and toat tu caxe of © deliverate. pai dle, and dang? rows ¢xeroige of Obber powers pot granted by faid compact, the Yates who are partics hereto hare the rigbt, apa are in duty Mound, to 1 for arrcating the progress of the ovil, and for maintaiving within tno respective limite the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them Again, the Kentacky resolutions of Je‘ferson, in 1799, declare— ‘That tbe principle and construction contended . that the ai goverument ie the ex lustve j mye of the Extent of tho povers acl gated to Ht, ap aothiag short of derpotism: s'nce the discretion of those who admin iter tbe pOtrrement and ot the Consution, wuuid be the rucagure of their powers; that tre se reral Mates who formed that inetrument beieg Bovercign aud iudepea teat, sulein, | Dave the epquestionsble rignt to judce of the tafractioa, Ard tbat @ ualiification by these soverrigatis of alt ua sotherized acts ¢oue ander color of that isirament is | the rightful rem dy. Again, inxegard to the famous proclamation of General Jackson against the nullification ot Sonth Carolina, it was well known (wud afterwards boast- ed of by its wuthor) to been written by that L ; aod it would never have been sauc- toed bp Gensel Jackson bat for bis anmuitigat-d animosity to John C. Cathoun und his adherents: | fur that proclamation palpably discouateaances, | a paees and denies every fundamental priacivle of e democratic creed, as sf distinctly laid down in the foregving quotations from the Virginia and ir \ Vernment, or umon of Sates, is “no: a league, it @ government of all the people of our country; & single nation;"’ that ‘‘each State hae parted wit so many powers as to constitate jointly with the over * a single natioa:; iad *cannet sec «de, de cause such a secession does nut break a league, but destroys the unity of @ matioa;” and ‘to call secession a consutational right is confounding meaning of terms;"’ and ‘‘disuvion is treason.” Let any of these positions be compared with the | above quotations from Jefferson Madison, and w th the whole scope and inevitable princy and inter noes necessarily resul from the Virgiain | and Kentocky resolutions of 1794 and 1748, and bow flegrant and palpable is the contradiction in every one of them. Every democrat whe has stucied the cons iturion inthe school of Jefferson | and Madison aa interpreted by those re o atious sees and anderstands their saicidal coatradicdou; ever, scholar Knows that itis not only an impossibili.y in its nature, but an atter ebsardity (ez of fermin’) to the entire (Tan was | declare that a sovereign State can commit treasou At ail, much less agaiost a mere agency aupoiated to altead to war aad commerce, aud acthiog else; and every ruch student knows U by the power of attorney, called the constitution, the sovereign States did net (as Edward Livingston declares) part witn or give away single right or power twin powers tor certain specitied purposes —the word | delegated Seing the only one used in that im<cra- ment, aud the tenth amendment expressly deetar. ing that ‘the powers nut delegated w te Cuited | Stat-a by the coastitution, ner prohitited by it to the States, are reserved to the Staves respectively, or tu the peuple.” Jesristan. The editors of the jonal IitePigencer having accorded to me, twice, the faver of publishing » brief statement of the grounds sod aachorities (of Jeftereon and Madison in ‘98 ‘w) on which the soverenn right of State secession haw founded, be my having added an: in detence of that right against th lengrhy, Jabored, and well- ducted attacks ten a ~Ay Mente of that journal; aud the editors having aso expressed t tae @ vesire no farther to prolong the discussion, ( mast ask permission to insert in your een argament nded essays; at the same time proctatining to The following remarks were written in reply to | thuse gentlemen that, if they should not wecord an i sope bef Oe Sanne In in upport ¢ speech of Senator Dongias folk. ta September, 1860, in which he anu od his intention to rere Lincoin, if electet, in coorcina, by force of arms any of the soversigg States « Union that shoul! choose to withdraw from the confederacy: — As I believe that many’ the views and arca ments adduced ta the following bret article have be fore been preseated hy even etateamen and advocates of Stats right determined te publish them in pemot Be 200 Camco oy mbm Le be da felligenow | me the favor of publishing at least the anb- of. | stance of she subjoined views in reply to ther own, I shall claim the honor of having over. a aod demolished their atmost efforts ttederal evctring that thie Caton, of federal it, ito an allience, oF leagae, or con Pact of sovereign States, bat @ consaitdated gov eromeut he yeovle of United America’ (a | ty woida, quoted hy themselves, of oe oe ee ee pee ee ticles of | constitution wuthorized aud called together ny the In reply to these consolida'ion views of the In telligencer, 1 would; in the trst place, lay down the proposition taae ail argament midy be regarded y,if not entirely, hopeless where Ue fau- ‘tal and elementary princtples of avy two pares (such as the whig aut democratic) are so | essentially oiffereot.-so diametrivaliy opposite ; aud bere the ancient maxim is most specially ay plicable, contra negantern principia non est dis putandin”—shere primary and elemmutary pen ciples sre depied argument ts taporsibie, La sit case alt that remains ws to show Uaat Lhe elomeutary principles of one or the otber of the parties are ui founded and ticorrect Chis Twili eadeavor ty titect in regard to the primary and tuudamental principles of he whig or federahst party by resort Ing to the true and obviogs siguttvstion oF wordr aud to the facts of history, and drawing just and necessary Conclusions therefrom, withvnt fol lowmg binaly the authority of distinguished mea, except where they covfirm the cuaclasioas of rea- son. Ip doing this [wilh adopt the form of inter. rogatories, the ouly rational replies to which. 1 contend, invelye a comple ¢ and utter refatstioa of those leading dogmas on whieh alone their party is dependent tor support. 1, What's the signification of the word Union; which is not only the aniversal denomination of our turm snd condition of government, aud coeva with its original establistivent, but 1 most es- pecially the worshipped idol aad symbol of the cardma!l whig or federal party, and elevated oy them, m the fervor of their idolatry, far abuve the consttotion which created it, and waich, oa the other band, in its pure interpretation, is the cherished symbol of the democratic crerd? Does not this word Union (under the sanctitied iusp’ra- tion of which, together with the word liberty, exclusive of the word “constitution,” the Inteili neer daily contends for consolidation, as did Yaniel Webster, the author of thut favorite motto,’ dors not this word ‘uuion’”’ siguify simply a neces-arily “a joining together of two or more separate bodies or Sr Can @ consolidated KOVeruMent OF A CONeCHVE cevpto, in euy rational sense whatever, be denominated a “union? Does not the very word twelf imply, ex ci termini, and two or mere parties? Is it not, therefore, # palpa- bie ovntradiction in those, ia wh daily utr: ance this cherished and adored word exists and in} any sense wastever & eg feagne or alliance? 2. What is the sole signitication of the term “federal,” which 1%, equally with the word “anton,” the original and wuiverss! epithet be- atuwed upon, aud apPertaining to our general go- vernment, to distinguish it from the governments of the States? Does not this tule or deaomination, in which both ancient and modern feder slists bh so mach delighted, and which ts daily used by the Intelligencer, Iv mean (being derived from the Latin 7otus, a teague or alliance) ‘what apper- toins lo a covenant, league, or coatract between parties!’ Can the sp tees A of the whigs Gixcover or mvent other possible meauing tor this fa- miliar word? 3. Again, what does the very title with which our overument was baptized, and by which it is kno#n everywhere, . fy? viz: ‘The United tutes.” that epithet necessarily and iuexor U ** alliance, league, or aniou?"’ Aud what becomes of all the narrow, verbal ped of the whigs ia confining and restricting thei to the single word ‘‘peopie”’ in the preambie of the constitution, instead of interpreting the entire titte or ex,ression used in that preamble, when it de- clares that ‘We, the People of the United states, J Mes be yt of Fr. their } eral onsolidationtst ward | Darrow, le word sophisury, when we honestly a 4 and fuitly cite the cohte GaUaane, had give itt ds aot do ordain,” &c? What, only true, jastand rations! me: expression, ‘We, the people of the Uni ed ates,” explicitly used in place of “We the people of jorth america,’ as it undoubtedly would he been expressed if the whig doctrine 0’ a consolid- ated government were correct’ Again, (to compicte the entire sentence) does it not read, ‘'We, the people of the United Btates, do or and = es! this con- stitation for the United States of America?” Does that language, im any sense, import that this overnment was made either by or for the cot- lective ‘people of United America,” as the fede- ratista have ever contended, and as the old fede- ralist and consolidation leader in Virginia, Geo, K. Taylor, argued in these very words? Here is em- the | Ployed the clear and simple ex; ‘ion “the peop’ ord le United Mates” “do ordain a constitution tor the United States; and yet the sophistical fede- tulists and whigs have the absurd effrontery to de- clare that these words ‘United States’ do not mean! United mtaves,”’ but signify a single groet State of North America. Did noteach and every one,of the several and separate States act indepen- dently and separately in adopting and ratitying the federal consttution, or compact of ulliauce, by which they agreed to establish a central age wovernment at Washington’ And did that instru- Ment, Agreement or compact have any validity or effect whatever in each of those separate States | until each had so adopted and ratified it? 4. When the thirteen Cotonies declvred their in- dependence of Great Britain, did they not necome, co fnstentt, thirteen independent and sovereiga States? Did not all sovereignty necessarily reside in them, as sovereignty cannot remain inabeyance, but must reside somewhere’ And, such being the } case, have those States ever done any act whatever hich they have abandoned, resigned or given up t reignty? Can sach abandonment be inferred from their having anited together for cer twin purposes of war and commerce, eitver m the old contederation, or the present Union of sove- Teign States? 6, Was not the convention which framed that Congress of the confederatioa, and didnot ‘that Cougress vote altogether by delegations of the States, each delegation counting one vote? And conld nut the seven smaller states, with less than une third the population of the whole, have catied the convention which framed that instrument, in- stead of a majority of the people of Americ? fth. Did not the convention thas called together, all ‘ote by States, cach giviag one vote and con!d not, in like manner the seven stnaller States, with one-third the pupolation, ether form or de- feat the constimmtion which they fi . ean my argument in repty to their many ex: | hie ey framed aud adopted? And did not this covstitution, when so framed go back to the Congress of the federation, tu be by them approved befure could be submitted by them to the several separate States for their ratification? And coald hot dis ratification also have been deteated by the seven staiter States, with one-third the popt vd their ability to reply) in bebalf of their | lation of all the States’ And moreover, could wot the ler tates (nine bemg required by th ») have adepted thet iastra inst the will of the msjorty ot the peop america? Ad could not the four sme with @ populntion of lew thar e-woth of the #hls t Nifent Ix it not say POUpie Had BO Kgouvy Whewrer in either fe | wave ny the people or # majority ot the whole people of the Union, but of the states? and being such repre- sentative of the states, is ve notinvested with the veto power for the very purpose of preventiog and wrresting every invasion of theirrights by the majo- rity votetu the House of Representatives, the States, in tact, through his action, interpusiog their veto? Is not this representative of the states, or the same , empowered to appoint their judges for the Judes are therefore em- Supreme Court, to decide controversies between the Again, can any one possibly be & citizen of the United States except by bemg « citizen of one of Is there any such thin the great State, or netion, of Does vot the constitution twselt show thes self-evi- dent tact in requiring that the very first chosen representatives shall have beou seven years, aud the tirst, and all otber Senstors for nine years, meaning, of course, citizens of one of the States, as there was then no other United States? m fact leave the Stare to preseribe the quatitications of voters for members ot Congress, by declaring that they shall have the qualidcatons required by each Mtate for electors of the most ouaeroas branch of the State Legistetare? vary and alter those qualifications as often and as much as rhe way choore or fancy? 1ith, Did not the several and separate States of this country adopt and ratify tne constiution, com- pxct of alliauce, aud power of attorney (for it ws ail three combined). at various and ditterent periods? Did net some of these states ax Rnode Iniand, North Carolina, &c., remain out of the Union or albance. tor many months. ant even two yi and could they not have remained (if they had so ther to the present day? force have compelled thew to come into the lexgue, Unron, or allance? He thatforre can be empl the league, tf they should from the partnership? pion (thas separstely ndopt- ed at different times by separate States) be called @ sulid government of the collective people ot United America? 11. Do not the favorite authorities, so constantly moted by ine Intelligencer, Alexander Hamilton, ames Madixon, of 1830; Daoiel Webster aud ever: Other federalist constantly, and ‘ ex necessitaterei” employ the terms ‘ Union,” “compact,” ‘federal government,” &c., each of these terms directly coptrad cting (in the very language they are com- peiled to use) the doctrines they co stend for of a goverumest of the “col United America!” am « citizen of nited America? (and all other citizens of the does not the power to each Avd cannot each ebosen) eat of it alto; and could any possinle then can it be and how cua such nevitubly a lewgue, alliance or partnersbip, of lives, to deciare thut our fora: of go is not ctive people of Does vot the very title givea to the great standard work of the consolidavionists “the federalist,” as (‘fodus), and by the dictiouaries, signify wining t) @ covensnt, league or contract!” Is not the tanguage of Madison, in the Vir- inia resolutions of "9%, deral government result from the com States are parties, and by the plain senre and intention of the instrament constituting that compact.” “compect,”’ as well ae “Union” and ‘federal yo- vernment,”’ employed by Webster, (though arga- against itin bis debate with General Hayne:) is Inter speeches in Congress and elsewher and most particularly iv his great speech at Ca; Springs, Oo 28th Jane, 1451, wherein ne said, do pot beritate to «a: ern States refase reted by its derivation Was not the word Does not syllogistic argaments it, that if the North: deliberately to carry into effect that part of the constitation which re- spects the restoration of fagitve slaves, the Sonata would no longer be bound to observe the compact. broken on one sige is broken on all yet does not the IJnledige have always Jone) that aay scuse & Compact, leagoe between the States, whilst the power of trath compets them uncunsciously to “Magna ext veritas et pre- Does not Mr. Madison tay, ta reply to Patrick “the prio ipal question is whether it be a or & consolidated govenment’ pardes to it? The prople, but not the people as composing one great bedy, bat the people ax com- posiug thirteen sovereigoues. Were it, as the gen- tleman asserts, a couswlidated government, the assent of a majority of the people would be suflicient for its establishment, sad as & majority yted it already, the remaiming States tof the majority, evon if they ananimeusly reprobated it themselves. Were it such a government, it would be cow binding on ople of this State, without the privuege of Bat, sir, ao State is bound by it, as it is, without its own cousent. amendmeats to be ratified by three-fourths of the States. and not by a majority of the people!” Washngton, at the same period, as follows, m writing to Goveraor Harri son, of Virginta:—“'The disineimation of the s-veral | Stater to yield competent unreasonethe jen ousy of that bedy and of one another, snd the disposition which see . vade each of being all wise and all po , does not Mr. —‘la this re a ion the proposed overninent cannot be deemed a national ove, since ts jurisdiction extends # certain enumerated ob- vd lraves to the several Staces the re- wid wary and inviolable sovereignty over all other phertly deny (ws other whi the federal consUtation ts convention or use these very terms! ts not the tangange Wers to Jongress. ther | Does not the Dred Sott decision of the Supreme Court throughout acknowledge sad recogaise the le of the general government being a league or anion of sovereign States? Is not this the per- vading doctrine of that entire, mog answerable argument of the eminent Chief Justi of that great sud learned tribunal’ Does not Mr. Betl, the Infeligencer’s chosen and greatly applauded * Union” Preaidency, use the fotiowing langaage his speeches in the U sited States senate in Tate: | “ The question is not whether the States shall con. | tinue auited, according to the letter of the cove- want by which they are bouad together. whotber they vhall ge to be practically and efficiently co-operati carrying out the ends of the association. Whether mataat trust confidence shall coatinue to auimate aud eacour- candidate for the trust shall step wa to check all pro aud confound all weltare, and, in the evils of endless and where you present that insue to me (say meseparation, give me disunioa, @i io preference to » Union sastaine.. only by ty covstitacional aod b trust and confidence. one of eternal dieeurd, of angry « ve rather separ stion, @ith all Mee oot that very state ress, endeavors fer th to entail avon the couatry all |. That is the qnestion; H ties, Withwat rec raty (or st ‘resueney, we recomm-ud * Bowe A “ “ ~ retetis ‘ i we language, to declare that a sovereiga creator can oS true natare of our conf: deratioa of suverenga States. } pact,’ or ip aby Wise providwg for te tuterpretetion as | pot chese electors either chosen by the people or B BALE. THE KTOCE, FIXTURES Lase bo ure ogethoe | TOE Ihcrefore It is that surprise Iteste cuckpressed { ruct; eB tRocutrary, te prasm seempuaticaty spose | the Legisature, or “appointed by the Governors” | Comumuit treason towards ite creature agency? Has | WOR, Saiuenae nernerrant tnd: weston Phtledeiobio yu tous at vuay be demwuded | 4 , meres 4 OF IL UB ab OFAivauee, AUG eetAbuIRUMeGE of COeEFOM LE ID ball di ine for itself? Woes not | 00% the contrary dovtriue been Iuid down by every Dy the exeney oF © a1 whilst we deem i in- | that Mr. Douglas should preteud to cull nimself & | ve ieee ee eubority af tbe prople of the Cuitai | #2 cach mtate sl letermine for Doce mot | Teal wuthorsty? and bas not the J "9 dis ate ty Wht LD democrat, and yet maintain the leading doctrine of | Ube bame end by Gutbority of the propie of the Uultat aliest State cast the same two votes in the | sv! wuthorty? and bas not the Intel genoer's dis the whips for the democratic party has always see decedent wah eeiaviay ta oneetitarive fur tee | Senate as the largest for Vice President in case of | tivsuished trend. Stephen A. Douglas, just declared . | maintained that the staudard expositions of the | Cones stares cf moriea’ the poo de (aos the wee | vacancy, and does no. that officer become Presi- | MC Sew 1 OV. ual oo Bat phe gol i gr eae Ss See | Colma the Virguit aad Keatucky resulta | yeign Stuce-) do ores n aud eetaniieh (not dent in'case of vucnncy in that office? Ppp ag tot ions other ites . edn spthe a9 argentine dll of Jefferson and Madisou m ‘Ss and ‘99, which | eeivniate) tir constitution (vot tuis ‘agoucy") fur tae | President, in tact and ‘rath, the representative of pe Spats rested’ relpouie Pagel i 8 unr eversary to dec!a © that # sovereign Siate can- not commit trea-ou. Aad in regurd to the aatho- rity of Luther Martia, so aumphantly quoted by the L.teligencer to prove that & sovereign State | cap commit treason, it isa rem erkable tact that the very opponite conclusiou was at that time drawn in the convention and elsewhere, and nas ever since heen drawn from be proposed amendment to the constitution, (which was laid ou the table by the couvention,) viz; that 60 far as it referred to the citizens of # State it was wholly sopertiuous, as po one deni d thata civzen can comm t trea- son, and the covstitation had already provided for that case in declaring that “treason against the Uniteo States spali consist only in levying war, (by tuch ciuzeus, of course,) ‘‘aguinst them, (uot it, or the government,)" or in adhering to their enemies, or wiving them aid or comfort; aud as +qually superfluous and vuyatory it applied to a sovereign State, a8 no intelligent and well informed statesman contended that @ sovereign State could commit tresson, And to prove that 1 uther Martin only intended bis auendment to refer to the citizens ot @ Sta e, we quote bis own words upon this sub- ject:—“ To save the citizens of w State from this disagreeable dilemma, ‘as to what he regarded a divided allegiane avd to secure them from being punixbable us traitors to the United States, wheu acting in obedience to the authority of their own State, 1 wished to obtain, as wn amendment to the Sd se stion of that article the following clause.’ Couid it be denominated tressoa it the majority, say even three-fourths of the States, should choose to wit draw from the Union, aud should leave one- fourth rematning in the league or alliance as con- -tivuting the sole pardes to this federal govern- ment! Could, then, that government, or ageney of one-fourth, employ force against the three-foarths wh» hed withdrawn to compe! thom to reraru? me $e it be ota AE yom thet this ral government ( r general agency) possesses or olds in tue slinple one single attribute of sove- reignty, When the precise term used in the iustra- men , or power of attorney, from whith it derives all ta powers, is the word “delegate?” And what does this word signify but ‘‘to entrust,” to ‘‘coum- mit power to an attorney or agent?” An woo ever beard of power of attoraey ht was pot revocable, it be expressly so declared? Whereas this constitution or power of attorney from the States is, beyoud afl contraven- tion, entirely revocable by States (4s every impartial lawyer must acknowledge), and ft ex- pressly declares, in one of its most bx ony pro- visions, that ‘all powers not herein exp! ly dele- gated are reserved to the States or the peupie.” Is it not therefore evident, from the very terma employed, that the sovereign States which formed bis federal constitution did not give up one single particle of sovereignty, but merely delegated or enirusted to their agenta or attorneys certsia limit- ed and revocable powers to be used for the benefit ot those States, and for no other purposes what- ever! 4 4. In sols te the taken by the Intell , that Virginia and Kentacky resojadous of ‘94 and ‘v9 merely intended that -he States should _— ee ee aud ©; usurpations by the gencral agency at Wa: , ix it not perfectly obvious that such a construction is too absurd to bear the touch of freason for a single instant when applied to such language as Madisou’s in the Virginia resolutions, viz: “Incase of @ de- liberate, palpsdle, and dangerous exercise of powers not granted by said compact, the States who are the parties have the right, and are in yA be A interpose for ——— <7 progress of the woe! respective limita the Throne its and liber- to them,”’ and that tney alone are of the mode apd measure of redress;” and ayam, in Kentacky resolationa, ‘‘Tnat the principle &nd construction contended for that the general government is the exciusive judge of the extent of the powers delegated to it stop no rhort of despotm; since the duwcretion of thoes who adminstet the government, and not the con- #titution, would be the measure of their powers; Foo the several be who tormed hones t sovereign . have the unques- trona’ to judge the infraction, and that /9 nullification by those sovercigntica of all unaa- thorized ace under color of that ins- strument is the hfot remedy.’ How can it be contended with any tence of rea. son that such language could ouly intefd a simple verbal protest? is it not wel: kaown that South Carolina had been sting against the “American system" of prohibitury aud oppressive tariffs for ten long years in vain before she resorted to Jefferson's remefy of nullification? Has the word “nullification” any other meaning thaa ‘tu avpul, render void, abrogate, destroy?” 15. In regard to the great stamoling block in the way of all federal coasolidationists und advo- | cates of force against sovereign States, that the President is bound to enforce the laws or acts of Congress, whether constita'iona! or not, thi b- stacle is most easily removed by the slnpli te- ment that he is onty so bound to respect to the citi- vens of States within the Union; but the very mo- ment a soveret tate chooses to withdraw, peither the President per any department of this agency at Washington bas apy sort of jurisdiction or cower whatever to act in the affairs of « ae Or seighboring State, any more than to exere! jurisdiction over Mexico or Nicaragua, or any other separate nation, P in the federal convention it was propoted three several times by the consolidation party, that the federal government should have the power to ase foree aganst a sovereign State, and three tenes it was summarily rejected by large majorities. In the course ot the debate thereon, Lather Martin faid—“At the separation from the British empire the people of America preferred to establish tnem- | selves into thirteen ate sovereigntics instead of incorporating themselves into one. To these they look up for security of their lives, liberties and secant alone they must look up. The de detend the ral went they formed to Fo oF the ambition of the a ‘ney are a run thep should defeat the oniginal end of the Union— lest the should prove dangerous to the so- vereig of the particular States which the be the most direct road to disunion! overnments derive their only eee from sreoat of vo maverand, sad my to auch li: mitations as they ¢! to impose? Is it not the ject of constitutions to restraia the government, | that of rightfal laws to restrain individnals? Is it not also the object of Constitations to protect the winority from the oppressions ity And can the majority, ia any w rightlaily go- vera, exept et to the restrictions aad Smit. tions of the o ution? Can it be supyomed t the descendants, in Virginia ane Soath Caro. lina, of the gatiane stiers oof Rogar | f eed the chivaleons and tt 1 Haguenote | f Ui FeRMOO— Yi Kemey Be Os Ky ou, vt Daymed + i i 5 3 5 5 $2 S a i i re : HE 3 H i z FF F a FOR, RALb as corres ewabl shed cumule ely fitted now tn sue;ere’ a! may. apply ov the p i LE eae te now to ¢m.. ‘Ol }ALE~AN ESGLIBE Devt ptreets, volt & 3 3 is been etaohebed 4 ‘COA SE WANTED —s PARTY JURT RE D—BY A LADY WITH TWO OUT) DREN, am Sdirtes 26 Weal Fearne nad boone aad ee nterl loextion. ot elauog te Houte #1TH she MUPER es Ieee W “iret seestoo Raid aed ‘hie bos 11 Hereid of & , OF HaRrrom! an sbD—A COTY aif be addres wab parvewars b x 6.0°6 Post TRD—A RWAL w Av ibe onboure 1S PARLOR FURNT pree le re.nedle, NRADT FORA T8480, reat New Fork in Terma must be moder ale urs, dtena boc 3 PH Powe ANIDD—BY A GENT) OMAN, WiPk AND OMGLM, Bret Fier forniehed, sav one esr or, to Deir Whth the une ef the Kirbee. cltnation Bot treet aed wee of lireatway, bet of Address stating terms and location, B®, box t rate bomen, an te beteeen “ann Aarons D Sey ARTBo—A PARTON AND four ho we on fire Sow ote 411 the morerp tm: pve ,rrivitoge of tals the’ ak ‘ fea, on wrk COARDS