in executive hands; a violation of that right which each State has, peaceably to secede from the Union. The President's proclamation has been converted into the vehicle of personal hostility. His expressions of personal feelings and relations towards the State, appeal rather to the loyalty of subjects, than the patriotism of citizens. This, too, after he has witnessed, without disapprobation, the State of Georgia avow, act upon, and carry into effect, principles identical with those now denounced by him in South-Carolina :

"The State regards with indignation the menaces which are directed against it, and the concentration of a standing army on our borders; the State will repel force by force, and relying upon the blessings of God, will maintain its liberty at all hazards."

Governor Hayne's counter-proclamation appeared on the 21st December, controverting, with wonderful ability, all the high-handed principles of the "proclamation." It dedenounced it as despotic in the last degree, and subversive of all the rights which the States could claim. If enforced, the States must be reduced to the melancholy condition of mere provinces or dependencies. The Governor's proclamation concluded with an appeal to the citizens:

"I charge you to be faithful to your duty as citizens of SouthCarolina, and earnestly exhort you to disregard 'those vain menaces' of military force, which, if the President, in violation of all constitutional obligations and of your most sacred rights, should be tempted to employ, it would become your solemn duty, at all hazards, to resist. I require you to be fully prepared to sustain the dignity and protect the liberties of the State, if need be, with your lives and fortunes. And may that great and good Being, who, as a "father careth for his children," inspire us with that HOLY ZEAL IN A GOOD CAUSE which is the BEST SAFE-Guard of our rights and liberties."

The legislature proceeded to enact two laws suited to the exigency of the occasion.

First "An Act to carry into effect an Ordinance to Nullify certain Acts of the Congress of the United States, purporting to be laws," etc., etc.

Second-"An Act concerning the Oath required by the Ordinance passed in Convention," etc. Here follows the oath, similar in nature to that known afterwards as the "test oath," and submitted to judicial cognizance.

At this dark hour, when everything appeared desperate, and military preparation was being made "to resist force with force," a mediator appeared. A gallant State threw herself into the breach, and arrested the arms of either party-Virginia! On the 26th January, 1833, the General Assembly of that old commonwealth,

"Resolved, That the competent authorities of South-Carolina be, and they are hereby earnestly and respectfully requested and entreated to rescind the ordinance of the late convention of that State, or, at least, to suspend its operation until the close of the first session of the next congress.

"Resolved, That the General Assembly of Virginia continues to regard the doctrines of State sovereignty and State rights, as set forth in the Resolutions of 1798, and sustained by the Report thereon of 1799, as a true interpretation of the constitution of the United States, and of the powers therein given to the General Government; but that they do not consider them as sanctioning the proceedings of South-Carolina indicated in her said ordinance-nor as countenancing all the principles assumed by the President in his Proclamation."

With these resolutions came the Hon. B. Watkins Leigh, Commissary from Virginia to the State of South-Carolina. He arrived in Charleston. At his suggestion, the President of the Convention, Gen. Jas. Hamilton, called together that body without delay. The matter was referred to a committee. Their report was favorable.

The ordinance of nullification was to have been enforced on the 1st February, 1832. Previous to that period, it became known in the State, that the legislature of Virginia had taken up the matter in the spirit of friendly interposition. It was also known, that a bill for the modification of the tariff was actually before congress. "By common consent, it was determined by the citizens, that no case should be made under the 'ordinance' until after the adjournment of the present congress," (4th March.) Mr. Verplank had, early in the session, introduced a bill in the house for a modification of the tariff. The bill retained the principle of protection. It was substituted, at last, by the famous "Compromise Act" of Mr. Clay, which was carried by a large majority. The President affixed his signature to it on the 2nd March. The protecting policy was surrendered. A gradual reduction of all duties was provided for. After June, 1842, an revenue duty to be established, in no case exceeding twenty per centum. Every duty on

articles not manufactured in the country was at once re pealed. The act provided for a "free list" of articles, cash duties, home valuation, etc. Dr. Cooper, of Columbia, in a note upon the act, with which we do not altogether accord, adds:

"I hope and trust, that it will prove, in fact, what it was intended to be, a full and final settlement of the tariff contest, a contest which adds one to the many proofs, that a tariff is a bad mode of raising revenue, and that a custom-house is a nuisance and a war breeder both at home and abroad."*

The convention of South-Carolina taking into consideration the modification of the tariff and the mediation of Virginia:

"Resolved, That the ordinance adopted by this convention on the 24th of November last, entitled "An Ordinance to Nullify certain Acts of the Congress of the United States, purporting to be laws laying duties on the importation of foreign commodities," and all Acts passed by the General Assembly of this State in pursuance thereof, be henceforth deemed and held to have no force or effect."

Two subjects here present themselves. They are too important to be passed over unnoticed. Before dismissing the facts of this exciting controversy, we briefly consider them.

First, the passage of the bill in congress known as the "force bill."

Second, the "test oath" established by the legislature of South Carolina.

* Dr. Cooper did not see far enough into futurity. The Compromise has been violated. Pledges were not strong enough to bind men in opposition to interest. The tariff of 1842 has passed. "The tariff bill of 1828 has, by common consent, been called 'the bill of abominations;' but as bad as that was, this-all things considered-is worse." We quote Mr. Calhoun's language. South-Carolina, in December, 1842, "Resolved, That while the people of this State regard the tariff act of 1842 as a breach of faith, as well as a violation of the principles of the constitution, they will submit to it as long as they can hope that a returning sense of justice will cause its repeal; but in the event that their reasonable expectations are disappointed, they feel themselves bound to declare, that they must, in accordance with their principles and recorded pledges, adopt such measures to redress their wrongs and restore the constitution, as in their opinion may be due to themselves and their posterity." The Democratic party have now come into power with an enor mous majority. It remains to be seen how much of the "returning sense of justice" will be discovered in it. The State has had faith in the promises of the party. She has struggled to bring it into power. One of its avowed principles has been "low tariff." If these promises prove as valueless as those that have already deceived us, the question will again arise, "Where is the redress ?"

1. The Force Bill. This was reported by the Committee on the Judiciary, of which Mr. Grundy, of Tennessee, was chairman. It extended the jurisdiction of the Federal Courts, and clothed the President with almost unlimited powers. Mr. Calhoun opposed the bill, and in one of those magnificent expositions of which he is so capable, denounced its every feature. We quote his language:

"What are the provisions of the bill? It puts at the disposal of the President the army and navy and the entire militia; it enables him, at his pleasure, to subject every man in the United States not exempt from militia duty, to martial law; to call him from his ordinary occupation to the field, and, under the penalty of fine and imprisonment inflicted by a Court Martial, to imbrue his hand in his brother's blood. There is no limitation on the power of the sword, and that over the purse is equally without restraint, for among the extraordinary features of the bill, it contains no appropriation, which, under existing circumstances, is tantamount to an unlimited appropriation. The President may, under its authority, incur any expenditure and pledge the national faith to meet it. He may create a new national debt at the very moment of the termination of the former, a debt of millions, to be paid out of the proceeds of the labor of that section of the country whose dearest constitutional rights this bill prostrates-thus exhibiting the extraordinary spectacle, that the very section of the country which is urging the measure and carrying the sword of devastation against us, is, at the same time, incurring a new debt, to be paid by those whose rights are violated, while those who violate them are to receive the benefits in the shape of bounties and expenditures."*

But the bill passed. The same convention which indefinitely suspended all operation under the ordinance nullifying the tariff laws, proceeded at once and without hesitation to nullify this last aggravation. The ordinance, so nullifying, remains to this day a law in South-Carolina. No repeal of the odious force bill has ensued.

2. The Test Oath. This asserted the doctrine of primary allegiance to the State of South-Carolina. It was inserted in the military bill of 1833. It was passed in pursuance of the ordinance of the convention; was contested in two memorable cases, and finally carried up to the Appeal Court consisting of three judges. A majority of this court declared it unconstitutional and void. The words of the oath were—“I do swear, etc., to be faithful, and true allegiance bear to the State of South-Carolina." An oath differing from this in but one particular, viz. by the insertion of the

* Calhoun's Speeches, p. 81.

clause in its last member, "and of the United States," was introduced into the legislature, and having the necessary majority, became a part of the constitution. It forms the amendment of 1834-the last amendment of that instrument.

These eventful times have passed. The facts and circumstances evolved have been committed to the sure charge of history. The actors have a place there. An impartial verdict will be pronounced by men of other times. The present is not always just. We know that the course of SouthCarolina has been denounced. It was to be expected. She may possibly have erred in some particulars. In what contest of this character has it been known that both parties have come out entirely spotless. Would we be responsible now for every act of the American Revolution? We would not. South-Carolina is willing to rest the question upon a full view of its every feature. She can never regard the argument of a sneer. She despises the puny shafts which malignity would level at her. Ever ready to defend the Constitution of the United States,-the sacred heritage of her sons, she feels that to resist encroachment upon that sacred instrument, is to defend it. She has resisted such encroachment in the past, and she stands ready to resist it in the future. While the Constitution and the Union are worth preserving, she will be true. For such a Union she has but one prayer, esto perpetua!

But if South-Carolina was wrong in the doctrines she advanced in this contest,-if she was wrong in her expositions of the Constitution,-wrong in her construction of States' Rights and State remedies,-if nullification, instead of being a constitutional remedy, was disorganizing and revolutionary, as insinuated in other parts of the Union, and re-echoed in our midst,—that man must indeed be ignorant of history, who holds the State alone responsible.

The doctrines of nullification originated elsewhere. SouthCarolina applied them. They had been over and over declared, on the highest authority, in other parts of the Union. Not declarations simply, but declarations accompanied with overt acts of such a nature, as not possibly to be misunderstood. State Interposition is a Pennsylvania doctrine. It was proclaimed there by her Supreme Court, as early as 1798.* The Court denied that the United States Court had

* See the case in Dallas' Reports.