to the constitution of the United States, made the following report: [JAN. 27, 1830. TUESDAY, January 23, 1810. ing to order, had under consideration the preamble and resolutions of the Select Committee, to whom was referred that part of the Governor's communication which relates to the amendment proposed to the constitution of the United States by the Legislature of Pennsylvania, had gone through with the same, and directed him to report them to the House without amendment; which he handed in at the Clerk's table. And the question being put on agreeing to the said preamble and resolutions, they were agreed to by the House unanimously. The House, according to the order of the day, resolved The Committee to whom was referred the communica- itself into a Committee of the Whole House on the State tion of the Governor of Pennsylvania, covering certain of the Commonwealth, and, after some time spent therein, resolutions of the Legislature of that State proposing an Mr. Speaker resumed the chair, and Mr. Stanard, of amendment of the constitution of the United States, by Spottsylvania, reported that the Committee had, accordthe appointment of an impartial tribunal to decide disputes between the State and Federal Judiciary, have had the same under their consideration, and are of opinion that a tribunal is already provided by the constitution of the United States, to wit. the Supreme Court, more eminently qualified, from their habits and duties, from the mode of their selection, and from the tenure of their offices, to decide the disputes aforesaid, in an enlightened and impartial manner, than any other tribunal which could be created. The members of the Supreme Court are selected from those in the U. States who are most celebrated for virtue and legal learning, not at the will of a single individual, but by the concurrent wishes of the President and Senate of the United States: they will, therefore, have no IN SENATE, WEDNESDAY, January 24, 1810. local prejudices and partialities. The duties they have to perform lead them, necessarily, to the most enlarged and The preamble and resolutions on the amendment to the accurate acquaintance with the jurisdiction of the Federal constitution of the United States, proposed by the Legisand State Courts together, and with the admirable sym- lature of Pennsylvania,' by the appointment of an imparmetry of our Government. The tenure of their offices tial tribunal to decide disputes between the State and Feenables them to pronounce the sound and correct opinions deral Judiciary, being also delivered in and twice read, on they may have formed, without fear, favor, or partiality. motion, was ordered to be committed to Messrs. Nelson, The amendment to the constitution, proposed by Penn- Currie, Campbell, Upshur, and Wolfe. sylvania, seems to be founded upon the idea that the Federal Judiciary will, from a lust of power, enlarge their jurisdiction, to the total annihilation of the jurisdiction of the State Courts; that they will exercise their will, instead of the law and the constitution. Ordered, That the Clerk carry the said preamble and resolutions to the Senate, and desire their concurrence. FRIDAY, January 26. Mr. Nelson reported, from the Committee to whom was committed the preamble and resolutions on the amendment proposed by the Legislature of Pennsylvania, &c. that the Committee had, according to order, taken the said preamble, &c. under their consideration, and directed him to report them without any amendment. agreed to unanimously. This argument, if it proves any thing, would operate more strongly against the tribunal proposed to be created, which promised so little, than against the Supreme Court, which, for the reasons given before, have every thing connected with their appointment calculated to ensure confidence. What security have we, were the proposed amendMr. HAYNE, in reply to Mr. WEBSTER, observed: I do ment adopted, that this tribunal would not substitute their not rise at this late hour to go at large into the controwill and their pleasure, in place of the law? The Judicia- verted questions between the Senator from Massachusetts ry is the weakest of the three departments of Govern- and myself, but merely to correct some very gross errors ment, and least dangerous to the political rights of the into which he has fallen, and to afford explanations on constitution; they hold neither the purse nor the sword; some points, which, after what has fallen from that gentleand, even to enforce their own judgments and decisions, man, may perhaps be considered as requiring explanation. must ultimately depend upon the Executive arm. Should The gentleman has attempted, through the whole course the Federal Judiciary, however, unmindful of their weak- of his argument, to throw upon me the blame of having ness, unmindful of the duty which they owe to themselves provoked this discussion. Though standing himself at the and their country, become corrupt, and transcend the very head and source of this angry controversy, which has limits of their jurisdiction, would the proposed amend-flowed from him down to me, he insists that I have troubled ment oppose even a probable barrier in such an improba- unfounded, sir, as every gentleman of this body will bear the waters. In order to give color to this charge, (wholly ble state of things? The creation of a tribunal, such as is proposed by Penn-witness) he alludes to my excitement when I first rose to sylvania, so far as we are able to form an idea of it from answer the gentleman, after he had made his attack upon the descriptions given in the resolutions of the Legislature the South. He charges me with having then confessed of that State, would, in the opinion of your committee, that I had something rankling in my bosom, which I desirtend rather to invite, than to prevent, collision between ed to discharge. Sir, I have no recollection of having the Federal and State Courts. It might also become, in used that word. If it did escape me, however, in the exprocess of time, a serious and dangerous embarrassment citement of the moment, it was indicative, not of any perto the operations of the General Government. sonal hostility towards that Senator--for, in truth, sir, I Resolved, therefore, That the Legislature of this State do felt none--but proceeded from a sensibility which disapprove of the amendment to the constitution of the could not but be excited by what I had a right to consiUnited States proposed by the Legislature of Pennsylvania.der as an unprovoked and most unwarrantable attack upResolved, also, That his Excellency the Governor be, on the South through me. conflict. The shaft, it seems, was shot by too feeble an arm to reach its destination. Sir, I am glad to hear this. Judging from the actions of the gentleman, I had feared and he is hereby, requested to transmit forthwith, a copy The gentleman boasts that he has escaped unhurt in the of the foregoing preamble and resolutions to each of the Senators and Representatives of this State in Congress, and to the Executive of the several States in the Union, with a request that the same be laid before the Legislatures thereof. The said resolutions being read a second time, were, on motion, ordered to be referred to a Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Commonwealth. The lateness of the hour when Mr. W. resumed his seat compelled Mr. H. to curtail his remarks in reply, especially those which related to the constitutional question. In the speech as here reported, the arguments omitted are supplied. The great importance of the question makes it desirable that nothing should be omitted necessary to its elucidation.- Note by Mr. H. N. 27, 1830.] Mr. Foot's Resolution. [SENATE. that the arrow had penetrated even more deeply than I the South. When that was done, the object was appacould have wished. From the beating of his breast, and the rent, and it became my duty to take up the gauntlet tone and manner of the gentleman, I should fear he is which the gentleman had thrown down, and to come out, most sorely wounded. In a better spirit, however, I will without reserve, in defence of our institutions and our say, I hope his wounds may heal kindly, and leave no principles. The gentleman charges us with a morbid senscars behind; and let me assure the gentleman, that how-sibility on this subject. Sir, it is natural and proper that ever deeply the arrow may have penetrated, its point was we should be sensitive on that topic, and we must continot envenomed. It was shot in fair and manly fight, and nue so just so long as those who do not live among us with the twang of the bow have fled the feelings which shall be found meddling with a subject with which they impelled it. The gentleman indignantly repels the charge have nothing to do, and about which they know nothing. of having avoided the Senator from Missouri, [Mr. BEN- But, sir, we will agree, now, henceforth, and forever, TON] and selected me as his adversary, from any appre- to avoid the subject altogether, never even to mention the hension of being overmatched. Sir, when I found the word slavery on this floor, if gentlemen on the other side gentleman passing over in silence the arguments of the will only consent not to intrude it upon us, by forcing it Senator from Missouri, which had charged the East with unnecessarily into debate. When introduced, however, hostility towards the West, and directing his artillery whether by a hint or a sneer, by the imputation of weakagainst me, who had made no such charge, I had a rightness to slave-holding States, or in any other way, we must to inquire into the causes of so extraordinary a proceed- be governed entirely by our own discretion, as to the maning. I suggested some as probable, and among them, that ner in which the attack must be met. When the proposito which the gentleman takes such strong exception. Sir, tion was made here to appropriate the public lands to has he now given any sufficient reason for the extraordina- emancipation, I met it with a protest. I have now met an ry course of which I have complained? At one moment attack of a different character by an argument. he tells us that "he did not hear the whole of the argu- The gentleman, in alluding to the Hartford Convention, ment of the gentleman from Missouri," and again, "that, told us he had nothing to do with it, and had nothing to having found a responsible endorser of the bill, he did not say either for or against it, and yet he undertook, at the think proper to pursue the drawer." Well, sir, if the same time, to recommend that renowned assembly as a gentleman answered the arguments which he did not hear, precedent to the South. why attribute them to me, whom he did hear, and by Sir, unkind as my allusion to the Hartford Convention whom they were certainly not urged? If he was deter- has been considered by its supporters, I apprehend that mined to pursue the parties to the bill, why attempt to this disclaimer of the gentleman will be regarded as "the throw the responsibility on one who was neither the drawer unkindest cut of all." When the gentleman spoke of the nor the endorser? Let me once more, sir, put this matter Carolina conventions of Colleton and Abbeville, let me on its true footing. I will not be forced to assume a posi- tell him that he spoke of that which never had existence, tion in which I have not chosen to place myself. Sir, I dis- except in his own imagination. There have, indeed, been claim any intention whatever, in my original remarks on meetings of the people in those districts, composed, sir, the public lands, to impute to the East hostility towards of as high-minded and patriotic men as any country can the West. I imputed none. I did not utter one word boast; but we have had no "convention" as yet; and when to that effect. I said nothing that could be tortured into South Carolina shall resort to such a measure for the rean attack upon the East. dress of her grievances, let me tell the gentleman that, of I did not mention the "accursed tariff”--a phrase which all the assemblies that have ever been convened in this the gentleman has put into my mouth. I did not even im-country, the Hartford Convention is the very last we shall pute the policy of Mr. Rush to New England. In allud-consent to take as an example; nor will it find more favor ing to that policy I noticed its source, and spoke of it as I in our eyes, from being recommended to us by the Senathought it deserved. Sir, I am aware that a gentleman tor from Massachusetts. Sir, we would scorn to take adwho rises, without premeditation, to throw out his ideas vantage of difficulties created by a foreign war, to wring on a question before the Senate, may use expressions of from the Federal Government a redress even of our griev the force and extent of which he may, at the time, ances. We are standing up for our constitutional rights, not be fully aware. I should not, therefore, rely so in a time of profound peace; but if the country should, confidently on my own recollections, but for the cir- unhappily, be involved in a war to-morrow, we should be cumstance that I have not found one gentleman who found flying to the standard of our country--first driving heard my remarks, (except the Senator from Msssachu- back the common enemy, and then insisting upon the resetts himself) who supposed that one word had fallen storation of our rights. from my lips that called for a reply of the tone and cha- The gentleman, speaking of the tariff and internal imracter of that which the gentleman thought proper to pro-provements, said, that, in supporting these measures, he nounce; not one who supposed that I had thrown out any had but followed "a Carolina lead." He also quoted, imputations against the East, or justly subjected myself with high encomium, the opinions of the present chairor the South to rebuke, unless, indeed, the principles for man of the Committee of Ways and Means of the other which I contended were so monstrous as to demand un-House, in relation to the latter subject. Now, sir, it is measured reprobation. Now, sir, what were those prin- proper that the Senator from Massachusetts should be, ciples? I have already shown, that, whether sound or unsound, they are not separated by a "hair's breadth" from those contended for by the gentleman himself, in 1825, and therefore, that he, of all men, had the least right to take exception to them. once for all, informed, that South Carolina acknowledges no leaders, whom she is willing blindly to follow, in any course of policy. The "Carolina doctrines," in relation to the "American System," have been expounded to us by the resolutions of her Legislature, and the remonstrances Sir, the gentleman charges me with having unnecessa- of her citizens, now upon your table; and when the genrily introduced the slave question; with what justice, let tleman shows us one of her distinguished sons expressing those determine who heard that gentleman pointing out different sentiments, he neither changes her principles, the superiority of Ohio over Kentucky, and attributing it nor subjects the State to a charge of inconsistency. Sir, to that happy stroke of New England policy, by which no man can entertain a higher respect than I do for the disslavery was forever excluded north of the Ohio river. tinguished talents, high character, and manly indepenSir, I was wholly at a loss to conceive why that topic had dence of the gentleman alluded to; [Mr. McDUFFIE] but been introduced here at all, until the gentleman followed if he now entertains the opinions attributed to him, in reit up by an attack upon the principles and the policy of lation to internal improvements and the public lands, SENATE.] Mr. Foot's Resolution. [JAN. 27, 1830. there can be no doubt that his sentiments, in these re-nal Improvement had been prosecuted on the principles of spects, differ widely from those of a large majority of the that bill, much of the inequality and injustice that have people of South Carolina; while, in relation to the tariff, since taken place would have been avoided. But, sir, I and other questions of vital importance, he not only goes am by no means disposed to deny, or to conceal the fact, heart and hand with us, but is himself a host. that a considerable change has taken place in the Southern The gentleman considers the tariff of 1816 and the bo- States, and in South Carolina in particular, in relation to nus bill as the foundation of the American System, and in- Internal Improvements, since that measure was first broachtimates that the former would not have prevailed, but for ed, at the close of the last war. Sir, when we were reSouth Carolina votes. Now, sir, as to the tariff of 1816, stored to a state of peace, the attention of our prominent I think a great mistake prevails throughout the country, statesmen was directed to plans for the restoration of the in regarding it as the commencement of the existing poli- country from the wounds of the war, and the public mind cy. That was not a bill for increasing, but for reducing received a strong impulse towards Internal Improvements. duties. During the war double duties had been resorted The minds of the eminent men of the South had, by the to, for raising the revenue necessary for its prosecution. events of that war, received, for the time, a direction rather Manufactures had sprung up under the protection inci- favorable to the enlargement of the powers of the Governdentally afforded by the restrictive measures and the war.ment. They had seen the public arin paralyzed by the On the restoration of peace, a scale of duties was to be opposition to that war, and it was quite natural that they established, adapted to the situation in which the country should, at that time, rather be disposed to strengthen than was, by that event, placed. All agreed that the duties to weaken the powers of the Federal Government. Interwere to be reduced, and that this reduction must be gra- nal Improvements spring up in that heated soil; and I have dual. We had a debt on our hands of one hundred and no doubt that, as a new question, hardly examined, and forty or one hundred and fifty millions dollars. Admo- very little understood, the people of the South, for a nished by recent experience, a navy was to be built up, short period, took up the belief that, to a certain extent, and an extensive system of fortifications to be commenc-and under certain guards, the system could be beneficially ed. The operation, too, of a sudden reduction of duties and constitutionally pursued. But, sir, before time had upon the manufactures which had been forced into exist- been allowed for the formation of any fixed and settled ence by the war, and which then bore their full proportion opinions, the evils of the system were so fully developed, of the direct taxes, was also to be taken into considera- the injustice, the inequality, the corruption, flowing from tion; and, under all of these circumstances, it was deter- it, and the alarming extent of powers claimed for the Fedmined to reduce the duties gradually, until they should eral Government, by its supporters, became so manifest, reach the lowest amount necessary for revenue in time of as thoroughly to satisfy the South that the system of Inpeace. Such, sir, was the true character of the tariff law ternal Improvement, on the principles on which it was to of 1816. By that bill, (reported, sir, by the lamented be administered, was not only unequal and unjust, but a Lowndes, a steady opponent of the protecting system) most alarming innovation on the constitution. the duties on woollen and cotton goods were at once re- The gentleman has alluded to my own vote on the surduced to twenty-five per cent. with a provision that they vey bill of 1824. Sir, I have to return him my thanks should, in the course of three years, be further reduced for having afforded me, by that allusion, an opportunity of to twenty per cent.; while, by the tariff of 1824, the du-explaining my conduct in relation to the system of Interties on the same articles were at once increased to thirty nal Improvements. At the time that I was called to a per cent., and were to go on increasing to thirty-seven seat in this House I had been for many years removed and a half per cent.; and, by the tariff of 1828, have from political life, and engaged in the arduous pursuits of a been carried much higher. And yet the tariff of 1816 profession, which abstracted me almost entirely from the is now quoted as an authority for the tariffs of 1824 and examination of political questions. The gentleman tells 1828; by which duties admitted to be already high enough us he had not made up his own mind on this subject as late for all the purposes of revenue, are to go on increasing, as 1817. Sir, I had not even fully examined it in 1823. year after year, for the avowed purpose of promoting do- But, even at that time, I entertained doubts, both as to the mestic manufactures, by preventing importations. Sup-constitutionality and expediency of the system. I came pose, sir, the New England gentlemen were now to join here with these feelings, and before I was yet warm in the South in going back to a tariff for revenue, and were my seat, the survey bill of 1824 was brought up. We to propose to us gradually to reduce all the existing duties, so that they should come down, in two or three years, to fifteen or twenty per cent.--would the gentleman consider us as sending in our adhesion to the American System by voting for such a reduction? And if not, how can he charge the supporters of the tariff of 1816 with being the fathers of that system? In this view of the subject it is not at all material whether the representatives from South Carolina voted for that measure or not; or whether the passage of the bill depended on their votes. On looking into the journals, however, it will be found that the bill actually passed the House of Representatives, by a vote of 88 to 54; and would have succeeded, if every member from South Carolina had voted against it. were then expressly told by its advocates, that its object was, not to establish a system of Internal Improvements, but merely to present to Congress and the country a full view of the whole ground, leaving it hereafter to be decided whether the system should be prosecuted, and if so, on what principles? Sir, I was induced to believe that no great work would be undertaken until the objects of that survey bill should be accomplished; that is to say, until the President should submit the whole scheme in one connected view, so that we should have before us at once all the measures deemed to be of "national importance," to which the attention of Congress might be directed. Sir, I did suppose that a few great works, in which all the States would have a common interest, and which The gentleman next mentions the "bonus bill" as the might therefore be considered as of "national importfirst step in the system of Internal Improvement. That ance," were alone intended to be embraced in that bill, and was a bill, sir, not appropriating, but setting apart, a fixed that, in one or two years, the whole of the surveys would sum (the bank bonus) for Internal Improvements, to be be completed, when Congress would have it in their distributed among the States, on principles of perfect power to decide whether the system should be carried on equality, and to be applied "by consent of the States" at all, and if so, on what principles? Sir, I know that themselves. Though Mr. Madison put his veto on that bill, more than one gentleman who voted for the survey bill it was supposed, at the time, to be in the spirit of his own of 1824 expressly stated at the time, that they did not message; and though I must express my dissent from the intend to commit themselves on the general question; and measure, no doubt can exist that, if the system of Inter- I was one of that number. And it was expressly because JAN. 27, 1880.] Mr. Foot's Resolution. [SENATE. Sir, these are good sound "Carolina doctrines," and if the gentleman finds reason to abandon them now, we cannot consent to go with him. I did not consider that bill as committing those who sup- might be doubted, whether Congress would not be actported it, for or against any system of Internal Improve- ing somewhat against the spirit and intention of the conment, that I voted against every amendment calculated to stitution, in exercising a power to control essentially the give any expression of opinion, one way or the other. I pursuits and occupations of individuals, not as incidental was unwilling to deprive it of the character which it bore to the exercise of any other power, but as a substantial on its face, as a measure intended merely to bring before and direct power. If such changes were wrought incithe public in a single view, the entire scheme, so as to en-dentally only, and were the necessary consequence of able us to judge of its practicability and expediency. Sir, such imposts as Congress, for the leading purpose of rein all these views and expectations I was deceived. By venue, should enact, then they could not be complained the year 1826, it came to be fully understood that these of. But he doubted whether Congress fairly possessed surveys were never to be finished, and that fifty thousand the power of turning the incident into the principal; and, dollars per annum was to be appropriated, merely to give instead of leaving manufactures to the protection of such popularity to the system, by feeding the hopes of the peo- laws as should be passed with a primary regard to reveple in all parts of the country. In the mean time, too, nue, of enacting laws with the avowed object of giving appropriations were made, and new works commenced, a preference to particular manufactures," &c. just as if no surveys were going on. Sir, as soon as I discovered the true character of the survey bill, I opposed it openly on this floor, and have since constantly voted against all appropriations for surveys. Sir, as to the sys- We have been often reproached, sir, with lending our tem of Internal Improvement, my first impressions against aid to some of the most obnoxious provisions of the tariff it were fully confirmed very soon after I took my seat of 1828. What was the fact? Not an amendment was here, and (except in cases which I consider as exceptions put into that bill here which did not go to reduce the dufrom the general rule) I have uniformly voted against all ties. That bill came to the Senate in a form in which it appropriations for Internal Improvements, against the was known that it could not pass. Gentlemen who would Cumberland road, the Chesapeake and Delaware canal, not vote for it, in that shape, but who wished it to pass, and all other works of a similar character. But, sir, if called upon us to aid them in amending it, to suit their the South, or the statesmen of the South, had committed own purposes. Sir, if we had lent our aid to such an obthemselves ever so deeply on this subject, does the gen- ject we would have deserved any fate that could have tleman from Massachusetts suppose it would afford any befallen us. We proceeded throughout on the open and excuse for their continued support of a system conducted avowed ground of hostility to the whole system, and on principles which now manifestly appear to be as uncon- acted accordingly. stitutional as they are unequal and unjust? Surely not. To disprove my observations, that the New England The gentleman has made his defence for his conduct in members generally did not support Internal Improverelation to the tariff of 1828. He considers the coun- ments in the West, before the memorable era, the winter try as being committed by the tariff of 1824 to go on of 1825, the gentleman quoted two votes, in 1820 and with the system. Sir, we wholly deny that the country is, 1821, reducing the price, or extending the time of payin any way, committed, or that Congress could commit it ment for the public lands. Now, sir, the only objection on such a subject, much less to the support of a ru nous, to his authority is, that it has no manner of relation to the unjust, and unconstitutional policy. But how, if such a point in dispute. I stated that New England did not supcommittal were possible, could the imposition of a duty port Internal Improvements, as a branch of the American of twenty or thirty per cent. commit us to the imposition system, before 1825. The gentleman proves that, on of duties of fifty or one hundred? The gentleman is mis- two occasions, they voted for certain measures in relation taken in supposing that I charged him with having, in to the public lands--measures which I had always sup1820, denounced the tariff as "utterly unconstitutional;" posed had been forced upon Congress by motives of inI stated that he had called its constitutionality in question. terest, but which, whatever may have been their character, I have now before me the proceedings of the Boston do not touch the point in dispute in the smallest degree. Í meeting, to which I referred, and will read them, that think this mode of meeting my argument, however crethere may be no mistake on the subject. In the resolu- ditable to the gentleman's ingenuity, amounts to an actions reported by a committee, (of which Mr. W. was a knowledgment that it is unanswerable. member) it was, among other things, 1. "Resolved, That no objection ought ever to be made to any amount of taxes equally apportioned, and imposed for the purpose of raising revenue necessary for the support of the Government; but that taxes imposed on the people for the benefit of any one class of men [the manufacturers] are equally inconsistent with the principles of the constitution and with sound policy." 2. " Resolved, That, in our opinion, the proposed tariff, and the principles on which it is avowedly founded, would, if adopted, have a tendency, however different may be the motives of those who recommend them, to diminish the industry, impede the prosperity, and corrupt the morals of the people." The gentleman complains of his arguments having been misunderstood in relation to consolidation. He thinks my misapprehension almost miraculous in treating his as an argument in favor of the "consolidation of the Government.' Now, sir, what was the point in dispute between us? I had deprecated the consolidation of the Government. I said not one word against the "consolidation of the Union." I went further, and pointed out, and deprecated some of the means, by which this consolidation was to be brought about. The gentleman gets up and attacks my argument at every point, ridicules our fears about "consolidation," and finally reads a passage from a letter of General Washington's, stating that one of the objects of the constitution was "the consolidation of the Mr. WEBSTER said, at that meeting, in support of these Union." Surely, sir, under these circumstances, I was anti-tariff resolutions (which were unanimously adopted) not mistaken in saying, that the authority quoted did not “There is a power in names; and those who had press- apply to the case, as the point in dispute was the “coned the tariff on Congress and on the country, had repre-solidation of the Government," and not of "the Union." sented it as immediately, and almost exclusively connect- But, sir, the gentleman has relieved me from all embared with domestic industry, and national independence. rassment on this point, by going fully into the examinaIn his opinion, no measure could prove more injurious to tion of the Virginia doctrines of '98; and while he dcthe industry of the country, and nothing was more fanci-nounces them, giving us his own views of the power of ful than the opinion, that national independence render the Federal Government; views which, in my humble ed such a measure necessary. He certainly thought it judgment, stop nothing short of the consolidation of all SENATE.] Mr. Foot's Resolution. [JAN. 27, 1830. All power in the hands of the Federal Government. Sir, from the nature of the compact, I aver that not a single when I last touched on this topic, I did little more than argument can be urged in support of such an inference, quote the high authorities on which our doctrines rest; in favor of the Federal Government, which would not apbut, after the elaborate argument which we have just ply, with at least equal force, in favor of a State. heard from the gentleman from Massachusetts, it cannot sovereigns are of necessity equal; and any one State, howbe supposed that I can suffer them to go to the world ever small in population or territory, has the same rights unanswered. I entreat the Senate, therefore, to bear as the rest, just as the most insignificant nation in Europe with me, while I go over, as briefly as possible, the most is as much sovereign as France, or Russia, or England. prominent arguments of the gentleman. The very idea of a division of power by compact, is The proposition which I laid down, and from which the destroyed by a right claimed and exercised by either to gentleman dissents, is taken from the Virginia resolutions be the exclusive interpreter of the instrument. Power is of '98, and is in these words: "that in case of a delibe- not divided, where one of the parties can arbitrarily derate, palpable, and dangerous exercise by the Federal termine its limits. A compact between two, with a right Government of powers not granted by the compact, [the reserved to one to expound the instrument according to constitution] the States who are parties thereto have a his own pleasure, is no compact at all, but an absolute right to interpose, for arresting the progress of the evil, surrender of the whole subject matter to the arbitrary and for maintaining, within their respective limits, the au- discretion of the party who is constituted the judge. This thorities, rights, and liberties, appertaining to them." The is so obvious, that, in the conduct of human affairs begentleman insists that the States have no right to decide tween man and man, a common superior is always looked whether the constitution has been violated by acts of Con- to as the expounder of contracts. But if there be no gress or not, but that the Federal Government is the ex-common superior, it results, from the very nature of clusive judge of the extent of its own powers; and that, things, that the parties must be their own judges. This in case of a violation of the constitution, however "deli- is admitted to be the case where treaties are formed beberate, palpable, and dangerous," a State has no consti- tween independent nations; and, if the same rule does not tutional redress, except where the matter can be brought apply to the federal compact, it must be because the Fedebefore the Supreme Court, whose decision must be final ral is superior to the State Government, or because the and conclusive on the subject. Having thus distinctly States have surrendered their sovereignty. Neither stated the points in dispute between the gentleman and branch of this proposition can be maintained for a momyself, I proceed to examine them. And here it will be ment. I have already shown that all sovereigns must, as necessary to go back to the origin of the Federal Govern- such, be equal. It only remains therefore to inquire ment. It cannot be doubted, and is not denied, that, be- whether the States have surrendered their sovereignty, fore the formation of the constitution, each State was an and consented to reduce themselves to mere corporations. independent sovereignty, possessing all the rights and The whole form and structure of the Federal Governpowers appertaining to independent nations; nor can it ment, the opinions of the framers of the constitution, be denied that, after the constitution was formed, they and the organization of the State Governments, demonremained equally sovereign and independent, as to all strate that, though the States have surrendered certain powers not expressly delegated to the Federal Govern-specific powers, they have not surrendered their sovement. This would have been the case, even if no posi- reignty. They have each an independent Legislature, tive provision to that effect had been inserted in that in- Executive, and Judiciary, and exercise jurisdiction over strument. But to remove all doubt, it is expressly de- the lives and property of their citizens. They have, it is clared, by the tenth article of the amendments of the consti- true, voluntarily restrained themselves from doing certain tution, that "the powers not delegated to the United States acts, but, in all other respects, they are as omnipotent as by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are any independent nation whatever. Here, however, we reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people." are met by the argument, that the constitution was not The true nature of the Federal constitution, therefore, is, formed by the States in their sovereign capacity, but by (in the language of Mr. Madison) "a compact to which the people; and it is therefore inferred that, the Federal the States are parties"---a compact by which each State, Government being created by all the people, must be suacting in its sovereign capacity, has entered into an agree- preme; and though it is not contended that the constitument with the other States, by which they have consent- tion may be rightfully violated, yet it is insisted that from ed that certain designated powers shall be exercised by the decision of the Federal Government there can be no the United States, in the manner prescribed in the instru- appeal. It is obvious that this argument rests on the idea ment. Nothing can be clearer, than that, under such a of State inferiority. Considering the Federal Governsystem, the Federal Government, exercising strictly de- ment as one whole, and the States merely as component legated powers, can have no right to act beyond the pale parts, it follows, of course, that the former is as much suof its authority, and that all such acts are void. A State, perior to the latter as the whole is to the parts of which on the contrary, retaining all powers not expressly given it is composed. Instead of deriving power by delegation away, may lawfully act in all cases where she has not vo- from the States to the Union, this scheme seems to imply luntarily imposed restrictions on herself. Here, then, is that the individual States derive their power from the a case of a compact between sovereigns; and the question United States, just as petty corporations may exercise so arises, What is the remedy for a clear violation of its ex- much power, and no more, as their superior may permit press terms by one of the parties? And here the plain ob- them to enjoy. This notion is entirely at variance with vious dictate of common sense is in strict conformity with all our conceptions of State rights, as those rights were the understanding of mankind, and the practice of nations understood by Mr. Madison and others, at the time the in all analogous cases; "that, where resort can be had to constitution was framed. I deny that the constitution no common superior, the parties to the compact must, was framed by the people in the sense in which that word themselves, be the rightful judges whether the bargain is used on the other side, and insist that it was framed by has been pursued or violated." (Madison's Report, p. 20.) the States acting in their sovereign capacity. When, in When it is insisted by the gentleman that one of the par- the preamble of the constitution, we find the words, "we ties (the Federal Government) "has the power of de- the people of the United States," it is clear they can only ciding ultimately and conclusively upon the extent of its relate to the people as citizens of the several States, beown authority," I ask for the grant of such a power. I cause the Federal Government was not then in existence. call upon the gentleman to show it to me in the constitu- We accordingly find, in every part of that instrument, tion. It is not to be found there. If it is to be inferred that the people are always spoken of in that sense. Thus, |