Sidebilder
PDF
ePub
[graphic]
[graphic]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

WASHINGTON, NOVEMBER 5, 1832.

VOL. VI............. $2.50 PER ANNUM..... BY DUFF GREEN. .........No. 28

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

THE STATE TWINS:

A COLLOQUY.

BY PETER PINDAR, JUN.

"One and inseparable, now and for ever."

North.

DEAREST brother, why complain,
For ever, in so sad a strain?

Is it not as clear and plain
As the light of yonder sun,
That you and I are truly one?
What's bad for you, must therefore be,
In all respects, as bad for me:
And vice versa-'tis as true,
What's good for me, is good for you:
I pray thee, then, no more complain,
Dear brother, in so sad a strain.

South.

Pretty logic, truly that,
When daily you increase in fat;
Whilst I, with every coming day,
Am going Calvin Edson's way.
Splendid clothes your limbs invest-
I, in squalid rags, am drest;
I have burthens-you have none,
Yet you say, we are but one!

If you will not grant relief,
Add not mockery to my grief-
By arguing, with logic vain,
That I've no reason to complain.
North.

Brother! brother!-take my word,
You trust too much to what you've heard;
You're not so thin-you grumbling sinner!
But that you might have been much thinner.
As for the burthen on your back-
I could convince you, in a crack,
That that is nothing but a hoax
Got up by interested folks;

So pr'ythee, brother, don't complain
Nor spend your breath in murmurs vain.

South.

Now hark'ye, brother-and let shame
Confound you, as I speak that name:
"Tis not the "word of folks" I take-
I feel the load-my shoulders ache!
Who, that has eyes, but must descry
The difference 'twixt you and I?
But, if yo: mean not to deceive-
If your own preaching you believe,
And argue not from wilful guile,-
Just take the load yourself awhile-
And I will cease my mournful strain,
And smile to hear you-not complain.

North.

Why, brother, as for that, you see
There are great odds 'twixt you and me.
To change with you, I am not loath,
Only, I fear, 'twould hurt us both.
I am by nature, weak-you, strong,-
To change our states were therefore wrong.
A burthen, which would only be
A joke to you-were death to me!
But, wherefore from the subject run?
I say again, we are but one;
That all things, rightly understood,
Are for our mutual harm or good;
The fact is as the noonday, plain,
So cease, dear brother, to complain.
South.

Brother, I prize as much as you,
The bond which makes us one, of two-
And I am willing to sustain
Much wrong, that we may one remain.
But, oh! remember, brother mine,
Patience may cease to be divine,
And may become that earthly vice,
Which men have branded cowardice;
The virtue I have practis'd long,-
Have bow'd beneath a load of wrong;
The vice, whatever fate I share,
I cannot-and I will not bear.
Union I love, to adoration;
Death, rather than Consolidation!

[blocks in formation]

from all projects of violent resistance to the laws."

We extract it that we may contradict, in the most unqualified terms, every inference which the writer has drawn. Nullification is not about to evaporate. It is about to be put into suc cessful operation. The Telegraph was not o riginally got up for the purpose of embodyings southern party round Mr. Calhoun. It was get up to maintain the principles which Gen Jackson was pledged to support, and for the vishtion of which it now opposes his re-election. Mr. Calhoun did not take advantage of southern hostility to protective duties, to come forward as the representative of the anti-tariff system. Seeing that sectional interests and local politics had become enlisted on this question, Mr. Calhoun, although earnestly entreated by many friends, refused to permit his name to be plac ed before the public as a candidate, upon the ground that the tendency of that measure would be to enlist those who are opposed to the tariff in a contest for the Presidency, when their whole energy should be directed to the much more important question of a repeal of unjust, unequal, and unnecessary taxation. It is not true that Mr. Calhoun hoped to act on the fears of Congress, unless it be meant, that he hoped to convince a majority, by nullification, that they had not the power to enforce an unconstitional and oppressive law, against the will of a sovereign State.

It is not true that the measure of redress ad

vocated by Mr. Calhoun and his fellow leal

ers" has failed; nor is it true that they feel that they are placed in a preposterous dilemma.

66

Mr. Calhoun and his fellow leaders," believe that a State has the constitutional power to place her velo on an unconstitutional law of Congress, and that in case such State, by the requisite majority, declares a law of Congres to be unconstitutional and void, the Govern ment of the United States has no other alternative, but to abandon the law thus declared to be

"THE WASHINGTON TELEGRAPH-Southern Politics-Messrs. Calhoun and Van Buren.Favorable augury may, we think, be drawn from the late tone of the Washington Telegraph. We infer from it what we always lok. ed for, that nullification is about to evaporateand further, that it was originally got up for the purpose of embodying a southern party round Mr. Calhoun-that he took advantage of the southern hostility to protective duties to come forward as the representative of the anti-tariff system--that it was hoped to act on the fears of unconstitutional, or to convene a convention of Congress, and thus to bully them into a repeal of these duties that this having failed, Mr. Calhoun and his fellow leaders perceive the preposterous dilemma in which they have plac ed themselves-that to proceed to actual forcible nullification is to insure their own ruin-that they are unwilling to renounce the hope of pow. er-that a connexion for that purpose between Calhoun and Jackson is out of the question that a union with Mr. Clay is Calhoun's only resort for future power and that this can be brought about only by disconnecting himself

all the States, to decide whether the law be constitutional or not; and believing that nullification is a lawful and constitutional remedy against the tariff, and that the question of the propriety of the exercise of the power of the State to nullif ydepends upon the people of such State, Mr. Calhoun, and his trends in South Carolina, having appealed in vain to the intelligence and justice of Congress, have sppealed to the intelligence and patriotism of the

[ocr errors]

people of South Carolina; and instead o find the people or to the States, respectively, it foling themselves in a dilemma, they find the peo-lows that if Congress attempts to pass an unple of that State rallying around the standard constitutional law, or a law which it was not inof nullification, confident that it will prove to tended that it should have the power to enact, be a peaceful and efficient repeal of the op-each State, quoad that law, has the same power pressions of the tariff.

that it possessed before the adoption of the con. stitution. The General Government is the creature of the States; it was created by the States, three-fourths of the States, being less than onethird of the people of the United States, can alall a delusion to suppose that ours is a governter the constitution at will; and it is, therefore, ment of a majority of the people. It is a government of united States, not a government of united people. This, then, is not a question of what the powers of the Federal Government ought to be, but it is a question of what the pow ers of the Federal Government are. If, in adopt

We know that it has been said that nullification is revolutionary. That it will lead to civil war!! How can it do so? All that South Carolina asks, is a repeal of the tariff, or else a convention of all the States to decide the question of power. South Carolina denies that Congress has the power to lay and collect taxes for any other than revenue purposes. A majority in Congress have said that they possess the power to lay and collect taxes for the encouragement of anufactures. South Carolina denies, first, that the measure is wise, and next, ing the federal constitution, South Carolina has she denies the power of Congress to do so, if it reserved to herself the right to nullify an unbe wise. Here a question arises between the constitutional law, then she has the right to do State and the Federal Government, as to the so, and her patriotic citizens who urge nullificapowers of the Federal Government. Who is to decide? The advocates of the tariff say the tional, unjust, oppressive taxation, are maintion against what they bel eve to be unconstitusupreme court. But South Carolina says that she was a State before the adoption of the fede- when she became a member of the Union. taining the right which she refused to give up, ral constitution; that she did not cease to be a Whereas, if she did grant the power contended State because of the adoption of the Federal for by the tariff States, all these have to do is, Government; that by assenting to the federal to call a convention of all the States to decide compact, she gave up no more to that govern- the question. That convention, when assemment, than was granted by the constitution; bled, will have power either to say that the that the constitution gave no power to the su- power to protect manufactures, by high duties, preme court, which is the creature of the Fed has been granted; or to grant the power if they eral Government, to decide questions of political deem it expedient. In this way the question power which may arise between her and the Federal Government. But S. Carolina says that ruin to any interest. It is thus that nullificamay be adjusted without civil war, and without the constitution has provided that a convention tion is a peaceful remedy; and it is thus that nulof all the States may amend the constitution, lification would preserve our glorious Union. and that such a convention, being thus empowBut to return to the question of the veto pow. ered, can take cognizance of the question of er. That power has been given to a single in the powers of the Federal Government, and dividual, and the abuse of a power is no argudispose of all doubt by enlarging, confirming, ment against the wisdom of granting it. It or denying, the disputed or doub'ful power. is a sufficient answer to those who deny that But does one say will you give to a single the little State of Delaware has the power to State, Delaware, (for instance,) the power to veto an unconstitutional law, to say that the set aside a law when all the other States are in little State of Delaware, as to all the purposes favor of it. We answer no. We will give no of legislation, as well as in the adoption of the new power to any State. The question is not, Federal Constitution, has as much political pow. whether we would grant a new power to aer as the empire State of New York; and that State; it is what power has the State reserved' it is apparent that when the States consented Each State, hefore the adoption of the Federal to empower one individual to veto an act of Constitution, had the power to veto a resolve Congress, unless it was passed by a majority of of Congress, and as all powers not delegated by two-thirds of both Houses, the little State of the constitution to the General Government or Delaware, having as great a voice in the matter inhibited by it to the States, were reserved to as the great State of New York, (she being

« ForrigeFortsett »