"Mo
lVhvle No. 44 K
Tarborough) (Edgecombe County, JV C.J Tuesday, February is, 1833.
Vol. IXJVo 23.
The "Xorlh Carolina Free Press,"
BY GEORGE HOWARD,
Is published weekly, at Two Dollars and Fifty
(.; per year, if paid in advance or, Three Dol
lars, at the expiration of the subscription year. For
any period less than a year, 'JVJenty-fve Cents per
month. Subscribers are at liberty to discontinue at
any time, on giving notice thereof and paying arrears
those residing at a distance must invariably pay in
advance.or give a responsible reference in this vicinity.
Advertisements, not exceeding 16 lines, will be in
serted at 30 cents the first insertion, and 25 cents each
continuance. Longer ones at that rate for every 16
lines. Advertisements must be marked the number
of insertions required, or they will be continued until
otherwise ordered, and charged accordingly.
Letters addressed to the Editor must be post paid,
or they may not be attended to.
PROCLAMATION.
By the Governor of South Carolina,
WHEREAS, the President of the United
States hath issued his Proclamation concerning
an u Ordinance of the People of South Caroli
na, to nullify certain acts of the Congress of the
United States," laying "duties and imposts for
the protection of domestic manufactures."
And whereas, the Legislature of South Caro
lina, now in session, taking into consideration
the matters contained in the said Proclamation
of the President, have adopted a Preamble and
Resolution to the following effect, viz:
WHEREAS, the President of the United States
has issued his Proclamation denouncing the proceed
ings of this State, calling upon the citizens ehereof to
renounce their primary allegiance, and threatening
them with military coercion, unwarranted bv tbe Con
stitution, and utterly inconsistent with the existence
of a Free State: be it therefore
"Resolved, That his Excellency the Governor, be
requested forthwith, to issue his Proclamation, warn
ing the good people of this State against the attempt
of the President of the United States to seduce them
from their allegiance, exhorting them to disregard
his vain menaces, and to be prepared to sustain the
dignity, and protect the liberty of the State, against
the arbitrary measures proposed by the President."
Now I, Robert Y. 1 1 ayne, Governor of South
Carolina, in obedience 1o the said Resolution, do
iiereby issue this my PROCLAMATION, sol
emnly warning the good people of this State a
gainst the dangerous and pernicious doctrine pro
mulgated in the said Proclamation of the Presi
dent, as calculated to mislead their judgments as
to the true character of the government under
which they live, and the paramount obligation
which they owe to the State, and manifestly in
tended to seduce them from their allegiance, and
by drawing them to the support of tt.e violent
and unlawful measures contemplated by the Pre
sident, to involve them in the guilt of rebel
lion. I would earnestly admonish them to be
ware of the specious but false doctrines by which
it is now attempted to be shewn that the several
States have not retained their entire sovereignty,
that "the allegiance of their citizens was transfer
red in the first instance io the government of the
United States," that "a Slate cannot be said to be
sovereign and independent whose citizens owe
obedience to laws not made by it!" that "even
under the royal government we had no separate
character," that the Constitution has created a
'national government" which is not "a compact
between sovereign States," "that a State has
no right to secede" in a word, that ours is a
Rational government, in which the people of
all the Slates are represented, and by which we
are constituted "one people," and "that our re
presentatives in Congress are all representatives
of the United States, and of the particular Stales
from which they came" -doctrines which uproot
the very foundation of our political system, anni
hilate the rights of the States, and utterly destroy
the liberties of the citizens.
It requires no reasoning to show what the bare
statement of these propositions demonstrate, that
such a Government as is here described, has not
a single feature of a confederated republic. It is
in truth an accurate delineation, drawn with a
bold hand, of a great consolidated empire "one
and indivisible," and under whatever specious
form its powers may be masked, il is in fact the
worst of all despotisms, in which the spirit of an
arbitrary government is suffered to pervade in
stitutions professing to be free. Such was not
the Government for which our fathers fought
and bled, and offered up their lives and fortunes
as a willing sacrifice. Such was not the Govern
ment which the ereat and
called the Union into being in the plenitude of
men wisuoms iramed. audi was not the Gov
ernment which the fathers of the republican
faith, led on by the Apostle of American Liber
ty, promulgated and successfully maintained in
179S, and by which they produced the great po
litical revolution effected at that auspicious era.
Io a Government based on such principles, South
Carolina has not been a voluntary party, and to
such a Government she never will give her
assent, b
The records of our history do, indeed, afford
tlie prototype of these sentiments, which is to be
iound in tne recorded opinion of those, who,
when the Constitution was framed, were in favor
ot a "firm National Government," in which the
States should stand in the same relation to the
union, that ihe colonies did toward the mother
country. The Journals of the Convention and
the secret history of the debate, will show that
this party did propose to secure to the Federal
Government an absolute supremacy over the
Stales, by giving them a negative upon their
laws, but the same history teaches us that all
these propositions Were reierted. nnH tv.i.si
. - j-- 7 - .. v. A cucidl
Government was finally established recognizing
Ihe sovereignty of the States, and leaving the
constitutional compact on the fnntin nf at I ni U
er compacts between "parties having no com-
his the natural and necessary consequences of
the principles thus authoritatively announced bv
the President, as constituting thft rnrv r
... . .- J "-""'"WO u 1
our political system, that the Federal Govern
ment is unlimited and supreme; being the exclu
sive jude of the extent of its own powers, the
laws "i congress sanctioned by the Executive
and the Judiciary, whether passed in direct vio
lation of the Constitution and rights of the States,
or not, are "the supreme law of the land."'
Hence it is that the President obviously consid
ers the words, "made in pursuance of the Con.
stitution" as mere surnl
j r "'iinuic
when he professes to recite thp
onstitution on this subject, he states that our
-social compact in express terms declares that
the laws of the United States, i (S tunnel i t nf inn
and the Treaties made under it, arc the supreme
lawoi me iana, ana speaks throughout of ' the
explicit supremacy given to the laws of the Uni
on over those of the States" a if a law of Con
gress was of itself supreme, while it was neces
sary to the validity of a treaty that it should be
uiuue in pursuance ni the Constitution. Such,
however is not the provision ot the Constitution.
That instrument expressly provides that "the
Constitution and laws of the Unitpd St 3fr: tuft is ft
- it,
shall 0c made in pursuance thereof, shall be
me supreme law ot the hind, any thing in the
Constitution or laws of any Slate to the contrary
notwithstanding."
Here it will be seen that a law of Congress, as
such, can have no validity unless made "in pur
suance of the Constitution." An unconstitution
al act is therefore null and void, and the only
point that can arise in this case is whether, to
the Federal Government, or any department
thereof, has been exclusively reserved the riHit
to decide authoritatively for the States this ques
tion of constitutionality. If this be so, to which
of Ihe departments, it mav be asked, is tin nrhi
of final judgment given? If it be to Congress,
tnen is Congress not only elevated above the
other departments of the Federal Government,
but it is put above the Constitution itself. This,
however, the President himself has publicly and
solemnly denied, claiming and exercising, as is
known to all the world, the right to refuse to
execute acts of Congress and solemn treaties,
even after they had received the sanction of eve
ry department of the Federal Government.
That the Executive possesses this right of de
ciding finally and exclusively as to tlie validity
of acts of Congress, will hardly be pretended
anu mat u ueiongs to the Judiciary, except so far
as may be necessary Io the decision of questions
which may incidentally come before them, in
"cases of law and equity, has been denied by
none more strongly than the President himself,
who, on a memorable occasion, refused to ac
knowledge the binding authority of the Federal
Court, and claimed for himself and has exercised
the right of enforcing the laws, not according to
their judgment, hut "his own understanding of
them." And yet when it serves the purpose of
bringing odium upon South Carolina, "his native
Siate," the President has no hesitation in regar
ding the attempts of a Slate to release herself
from the control of the Federal Judiciary, in a
matter affecting her sovereign rights, as a viola
tion of the Constitution.
It is unnecessary to enter into an elaborate ex
amination of the subject. It surely cannot admit
of a doubt, that by the Declaration of Indepen
dence, the several colonies became "free, sove
reign, and independent States," and our political
history, will abundantly show that at every sub
sequent change in their condition up to the for
mation .of our present Constitution, the States
preserved their sovereignty. The discovery of
this new feature in our'syslem, that "the States
exist only as members of the Union that before
the Declaration of Independence, we were known
only as United Colonies" and that even under
the Articles of Confederation, the States were
considered as forming "collectively one nation"
without any right of refusing to submit to
"any decision of Congress"- was reserved to the
President and his immediate predecessor. To
the latter "belongs the invention, and upon the
former, will unfortunately fall the evils of redu
cing it to practice."
South Carolina holds the principles now pro
mulgated by the President (as they must always
be held by all who claim to be supporters of the
rights of the States,) "as contradicted by the let
ter of the Constitutionunauthorised by its spi
rit inconsisteut with every principle on which
it was founded destructive of all the objects for
which it was framed" utterly incompatible with
the very existence of the States and absolutely
fatal to ihe rights and liberties of the people.
South Carolina having solemnly and repeatedly
expressed to Congress,and the" world the princi
ples which she believes to constitute the very
pillars of the Constitution, it is deemed unneces
sary to do more at this time, than barely to pre
sent a summary of those great fundamental
truths, which she believes can never be subvert
ed without the inevitable destruction of the lib
erties of the people and of the Union itself.
South Carolina has never claimed (as is asserted
by the President.) the right of "repealing at
pleasure, all the reroute laws of. the Union,"
much less the right of "repealing' the Constitu
tion itself, and laws passed to give it effect which
have never been alleged to be unconstitutional."
She claims only the right to judge of infractions
of the constitutional compact, in violation of the
reserved rights of the State, and of arresting the
progress of usurpation within her own limits,
and when, as in the Tariffs of 182S and 1S32, re
venue and protection constitutional and uncon
stitutional objects, have been so mixed up toge
ther, that it is found impossible to draw the line
of discrimination she has no alternative, but to
consider the whole as a system, unconstitutional
in its character, and Jo leave it to those who have
'woven the web, to unravel the threads." South
Carolina insists, and she appeals to the whole po
litical history of our country, in support of her
position, "that the Constitution of the United
States is a compa between sovereign States
that it creates a confederated republic, not hav
ing a single feature of nationality in its founda
tionthat the people of the several States as dis
tinct political communities, ratified the Constitu
tion, each Stale acting for itself, and binding its
own citizens, and not those of any other State,
the act of ratification declaring it to be binding
on the States so ratifying the States are its au
thors, their power created it their voice clothed
it with authority ihe government which it for
med is composed of their agents, and the Union
of which it is the bond is a Union of States and
not of individuals that as regards the founda
tion and extent of its power, the Government of
the. United States is strictly what its name im
plies, a Federal Government that the States are
as sovereign now as they Were prior to the en
tering into the compact that the Federal Con
stitution is a confederation in the nature of a
treaty or an elliance by which so many sove
reign States agreed to exercise their sovereign
powers conjoint h upon certain objects of exter
nal concern in which they are equally interested,
such as wai peace, commerce, foreign negotia
tion, and Indian Trade; and upon alt other sub
jects of civil government, they were to exercise
their sovereignty separately.
For the convenient conjoint exercise of the
sovereignty of the States, there must of necessity
be some common agency or functionary. This
agency is the Federal Government. It repre
sents the confederated Slates, and executes their
fjoint will, as expressed in the compact. The
powers ol this government are wholly derivative.
It possesses no more inherent sovereignty than
an incorporated town, or any other great corpo
rate body it is a political corporation, it looks
for its powers to an extei ior source. 'J lie source
is the States.
South Carolina claims that hv tlie Dk 'ia
of Independence, she became, and has ever since
continued a free, sovereign & independent State.
That as a sovereign Slate, she hns the inherent
power, to do all tho?e acts, which by the law of
nations, any Prince or Potentate may of right do.
That like all independent States, she neither has,
nor ought she to suffer any other restraint upon
her sovereign will and pleasure, than those high
moral obligations, under which all Princes and
States are bound before God and man to perform
their solemn pledges. The inevitable conclu
sion from what has been said, therefore is, that
as in all cases of compact between independent
sovereigns, where from the very nature of things
there can be no common judge or umpire, each
sovereign has a right "to judge as well of infrac
tions, as of the mode and measure of redress,"
so in the present controversy, between South Ca
rolina and the General Government, it belongs
solely to her, by her delegates in solemn Con
vention assembled, to decide whether the Fede
ral compact be violated, and what remedv the
State ought to pursue. South Carolina, "there
fore, cannot, and will not yield to any depart
ment of the Federal Government, a right which
enters into Ihe essence of all sovereignty, and
without which it would become a bauble and a
name."
Such are the doctrines which South Carolina
has, through her Convention, solemnly promul
gated to the world, and by them she will stand
or fall; such were the principles promulgated by
Virginia in "9S, and which then received the
sanction of those great men, whose recorded sen
timents have come down to us as a light to our
feet and a lamp to our path. It is Virginia, and
not South Carolina, who speaks, when it is said
that she
"Views the powers of the Federal Government as
resulting from the compact to which the States are
parties, as limited by the plain sense and intention
of the instrument constituting that compact as no
farther valid than they are authorised by the grants
enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a de
liberate, palpable and dangerous exercise of other
powers, not granted by the said compact, the States
who are parties thereto have the right, and are in du
ty bound to interpose, for arresting the progress of
the evil, and for maintaining within their respective
limits the authorities, rights and liberties appertain
ing to them."
It is Kentucky, who declared in '99, speaking in
the explicit language of Thomas Jefferson, that
,4The principles and construction contended for by
members of the State Legislatures, the very same
now maintained by the President, that the General
Government is the exclusive judge of the extent of the
powers delegated to it, stop nothing short of despot
ism since the discretion of those who administer the
government, and not the Constitution, would be the
measure of their powers. That the several States
who formed the instrument being sovereign and inde
pendent, have the unquestionable right to judge of
the infraction, and that a Nullification by those sove
reignties, of all unauthorised acts done under color
of that instrument, is the righrfui remedy."
It is the great Apostle of American liberty
himself who has consecrated these pi inciples, and
lelt them as a legacy to the American people, re
corded by his own hand. It is by him that we
are instructed thal in the constitutional com
pact 'Each State acceded as a State, and is an integral
party, its co-States forming as to itself the other par
ty," that "they alone being parties to the compact,
are solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the
powers "exercised under it, Congress being not a par
ty but merely the creature of the compact;" that "it
become a sovereign State to submit to undelegated,
and consequently unlimited power, in no man or body
of men upon earth, that where powers are assumed
which have not been delegated the very cast- now
before us a nullification of the act is the rightful re
medy; that every State has a natural right in cases
not within the compact casus non fcderis to nullify
of their own authority all assumption of power by
others within their limits, and that without this right
they would be under the dominion absolute and un
limited, of whomsoever might exercise the right of
judgment for them," and that in case of acts being
passed by Congress "so palpably against the Consti
tution as to amount to an undisguised declaration, that
the compact is not meant to be the measure of the
powers of the General Government, but that it will
proceed to exercise over the States all powers what
soever, it would be the duty ot the States to declare
the acts void and of no force, and that each should,
take mrusures of its own for providing that neither
such acts, nor any of the General Government not
plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitu
tion, shall be exercised within their respective ter
ritories." .
Il is on these great and essential truths, that
.South Carolina has now acted. Judging for her
self as a sovereign State, she has pronounced the
Protecting System, in all i Is branches, to be a
"gross, deliberate, and palpable violation of the
constitutional compact;" and having exhausted
every other means of redress, she has in the ex
ercise of her sovereign rights as one of the par
ties to the compact, and in the performance of a
high and sacred duty, interposed for arresting
the evil of usurpation, within her own limits
by declaring these acts to be "null, void, and no
law, and taking measure of her own. that they
shall not be enforced within her limits."
South Carolina has not "assumed" what could
be considered as at all doubtful, when she ast rts
JMhat the acts in question, were in reality inten
ded for the protection of manufactures;" that
their "operation is unequal;" that the "amount
received by them is greater than is required by
the wants of the government;" and finally, "that
the proceeds are to be applied to objects unau
thorized by the Constitution." These facts are
notorious these objects openly avowed. The
President, without instituting, any inquisition in
to motives, has himself discovered and publicly
denounced them; and his officer of finance is ev
en now devising measures intended as we are
told to correct these acknowledged abuses.
It is a vain and idle dispute about words, to
ask whether this right of State interposition may
be most properly styled, a constitutional, a sove
reign, or a reserved right. In calling this right
constitutional, it could never have been intended
to claim it as a right granted by, or derived from
the Constitution, but it is claimed as consistent
with its genius, its letter and its spirit; it being
not only distinctly understood, at the time of ra
tifying the Constitution, but expressly provided
for. in the instrument itself, that all sovereign
rights, not agreed to be exercised conjointly,
should be exerted separately by the Stales. Vir
ginia declared in reference to the right asserted
in the Resolutions of 'OS, above quoted, i ven af
ter having fully and accurately re-examined and
re-considercd these resolutions, "that she found
it to be her indispensable duty to adhere to the
same, as founded in truth, as consonant with
the Constitution, and as conducive to its wel
fare," and Mr. Madison himself, asserted them
to be perfectly "constitutional and conclusive.."
It is wholly immaterial, however, by what
name this right may be called, for if the Constitu
tion be "a compact to which the Stales are par
ties," if acts of the Federal Government are no
farther valid than they are authorized by the
grants enumerated in that compact," then wo
See original draught of the Kentucky Resolutions
in the hand-writing of Mr. Jefferson, lately published
by bh grandson.