i 
 
 B 
 
 B 
 
 m 
 
 i 
 
 WM? 
 
 ®S 
 
Class L 584 
 
 Book -P61-' 
 
 .3 
 
THE 
 HUINT.ESSENCE OF LONf/ SPEECHES. 
 
 MtRANGED A! 
 
 A POLITICAL. CATECHISM; 
 BIT A XiADlT, 
 
 J'OR HER GOD-DAUGHTER. 
 
 - 
 
 CHARLESTON: 
 PRINTED BY A. E. MILLER 
 
 No. 4. Broad-street. 
 
 ism 
 
 a 
 
S 
 
 t-r 
 
 
 i s 
 
A POLITICAL. CATECHISM, 
 
 
 Question— What do we understand by the Federal 
 A Union ? 
 
 Answer— It is an agreement between Sovereign 
 States, to forbear exerting their sovereign power over 
 certain defined objects, and to exert jointly their sov- 
 ereign power over other specified objects, through the 
 agency of a General Government. Each State agrees 
 to exert its full sovereign power jointly, for all exter- 
 nal purposes ; and separately, for all internal pur- 
 poses, or State concerns. 
 
 Q. Where is this Agreement found ? 
 
 A. In the bond of Union, or compact between the 
 States, called the Federal Constitution. 
 
r 
 
 tj. What is the nature of the Federal Constitution f 
 
 A. It is a compact based upon cautious and jealous 
 specifications. The distinguished body of men who 
 framed it, guarded and defined every power that was 
 to be exercised through the agency of the General 
 Government — and every other power not enumerated 
 in the compact, was to be reserved and exercised by 
 rhe States. 
 
 Q. Did the States, in forming the Constitution, di- 
 vest themselves of any part of their Sovereignty? 
 
 A. Of not a particle. The individuality and sove- 
 reign personality of the States was not at all impair- 
 ed. The States agreed, by the Constitution, that they 
 would unite in exerting their powers, therein specified 
 and defined, for the purpose and objects therein desig- 
 nated, and through the agency of the machinery 
 therein created ; but the power exercised by the Func- 
 tionaries of the General Government, is not inherent 
 in tliem, but in the States whose agents they are. 
 The Constitution is their Power of Attorney, to do 
 
 ;ertain acts; and contains, connected with their autho- 
 rity to act, their letter of instruction, as to the manner 
 in which they shall act. They are the Servants. The 
 power which gives validity to their acts is in then 
 
 Masters — the States. 
 
Q. Where is the power of Congress during th 
 recess of that body? 
 
 A. It possesses no sovereign pfdwer—it is but the 
 stgfent of the Sovereign States. 
 
 Q. Can you illustrate this retention of Sovereignty 
 by the States by any other example ? 
 
 A. Suppose an individual, for instance, was to sti- 
 pulate to transact a portion of his business by an 
 ao-ent, and the remainder by himself, and to forbear 
 to exert his moral faculties, and physical energies 
 upon that class of subjects, which, by his agreement, 
 are to be acted upon by his agent. Has he by his 
 stipulation lessened, impaired or diminished his moral 
 or physical powers ? On the contrary, the validity of 
 the agency depends upon his retaining those facul- 
 ties, for if he shall become insane, or die, the ageni 
 cannot act, because tiie power of his principal has be- 
 come extinct ; so it is the power, the full subsisting 
 Sovereign Power of the States, which gives validity to 
 the acts of the General Government. The validity 
 of these acts does not result from the exercise of a 
 portion of the Sovereign Power of each State. 
 
 Q. Why then has it been supposed by some, that 
 when the States formed the Constitution, they cut th 
 
() 
 
 Sovereignty of each State into two parts, and gave 
 much the larger portion to the General Government ? 
 
 A. Many erroneous and mischievous opinions pro- 
 ceed from ignorance of the true meaning of words. 
 Sovereignty, Rebellion, Nullification, <fcc. we hear 
 every day used, without any precise idea being at- 
 tached to their signification. 
 
 Q. What is the meaning of Sovereignty ? 
 
 A. It is the will of civil society in the Social Com- 
 pact, which society is a moral person, whose will, like 
 the will of the human being, cannot be divided with- 
 out destroying the person ; we can conceive the will 
 operating in a thousand various ways, but we cannot 
 conceive its separation into parts ; neither can we con- 
 ceive of the separation of Sovereignty — its unity and 
 life are inseparable. 
 
 Q. How do you define Rebellion ? 
 
 A. It is the resistance of an inferior to the lawful 
 authority of a superior. A child may rebel against a 
 parent — a slave against his master — citizens against 
 the government, and colonies against the mother- 
 country — but a State cannot rebel; because one Sov- 
 ereign cannot rebel against another, for all Sovereigns 
 
are equal. The Sovereignty of the little State of De- 
 laware is equal to that of New- York, or of Russia, 
 though the physical power of those Sovereignties arc 
 vastly different. The supposition, therefore, that a 
 Sovereign State can commit Rebellion,* Treason, or 
 any crime whatever, is utterly inadmissible in the 
 science of politics. The idea of crime cannot exist 
 where there is no conceivable or possible tribunal, 
 before which the culprit could be arraigned and con- 
 victed. Still less can any State be supposed to incur 
 the guilt of rebellion or treason, by resisting an uncon- 
 stitutional law of the General Government. The 
 General Government is the creature of the States — 
 the offspring of their Sovereign Power. Is the Crea- 
 tor to be governed by the lawless authority of the Crea- 
 ture 1 We cannot invert the rule of reason and of 
 law upon that subject, and say, that the superior in- 
 curs guilt by resisting the inferior, and not the infe- 
 rior by resisting the superior. 
 
 Q. What is the meaning of Nullification ? 
 
 * Rebel. — Was a State Government to nullify even a Consti- 
 tutional law of Congress, it could not place the State (that is the 
 people of the State) in an attitude of rebellion ; if war ensues, 
 it is one government warring against another, as England 
 against France, dec. The essence of Rebellion is inferiority. 
 
A. It is the veto* of a Sovereign State on an un- 
 constitutional law of Congress. 
 
 Q. Arc not unconstitutional laws, of course, null 
 and void ? 
 
 A. Undoubtedly ; and an act of Usurpation is not 
 obligatory; it is not law, and resistance is justifiable. 
 In virtue of her Sovereignty, the State is the judge of 
 her own rights, and bound as Sovereign to protect her 
 citizens, which she does by nullifying! the obnoxious 
 
 * Veto. — A writer in one of the Gazettes says, that Veto is sus- 
 pensive and Nullification destructive. It is to be hoped that the 
 late Veto of the President was not meant to be suspensive, but 
 will prove altogether destructive. 
 
 t Nullifying. — It is contended that the Kentucky and Virgi- 
 nia Resolutions, which confirm the right of Nullification, in 
 cases of a palpable, deliberate, and dangerous usurpation of 
 power, speak of resistance by the mode pointed out in them, al- 
 ways in the plural number. That it is the States which are 
 bound to interpose ; and that, consequent!), a State, being in 
 the singular number, cannot interfere and act individually. 
 This is a mere evasion of the enemies of State Rights; for ex- 
 ample : If it were said that the submission or alarm-men were 
 permitted to reveal the secret, by which the heterogeneous, spu- 
 rious party obtained the late victory; is it inferred that they 
 are all to assemble together to avail themselves of the permis- 
 sion, and that one alarmist, being in the singular number, can- 
 not, individually, divulge it? It is the individuality and sove- 
 reign personality of the State which confers the right of Nul- 
 lification. 
 
law, and releasing them from any obligation to 
 obey it. 
 
 Q. Has not this right of the State been denied? 
 
 A. Only by those who are enemies of State Rights, 
 Whose subterfuge is, that they can find Nullification 
 no where in the Constitution. Suppose a State was 
 to make a treaty with a foreign government, to coin 
 money, to grant letters of marque, or assume any 
 power that she had by the compact delegated to the 
 General Government. When Congress should nulli- 
 fy the assumption, would the State have any right to 
 complain that she could not find Nullification in the 
 Constitution. If the implied right is reciprocal, the 
 State possesses the double right to Nullify, for all 
 rights are reserved to her, that are not specified in the 
 Constitution. 
 
 Q. Is there no other check upon the General Gov- 
 ernment, than the one just mentioned of Nullification ? 
 
 A. The oath, the several legislative, executive and 
 judicial officers of the several States take to support 
 the Federal Constitution, ought to be as effectual se- 
 curity against the usurpation of the General Govern- 
 ment, as it is against the encroachments of the State 
 Governments. For the increase of the powers by 
 
 2 
 
usurpation, is as clearly a violation of the Federal 
 Constitution, as a diminution of these powers by pri- 
 vate encroachments; and that oath obliges the officers 
 of the several States as vigorously to oppose the one 
 as the other. 
 
 Q. Could then any collision arise between the States 
 and the Federal Government, ivere each confined to its 
 proper sphere ? 
 
 A. The Constitution has left them sufficient space 
 to move harmoniously together; but it is the General 
 Government that is continually wandering out of the 
 sphere of its legitimacy, and usurping powers, that the 
 combined wisdom of the States imagined, they had 
 carefully guarded from all encroachments. 
 
 Q. Have the States ever resumed any of the powers 
 they have delegated to the General Government ? 
 
 A. Never, in a single instance, have they violated, 
 or attempted to violate the Constitution. The ene- 
 mies of State Rights pretend, that had the States the 
 right to judge of an unconstitutional law of Congress, 
 (in other words, of an infringement on their Sove- 
 reignty) they would transcend their appropriate 
 
11 
 
 sphere, and usurp* the powers assigned to the Gene- 
 ral Government. On the contrary, it is not the inter- 
 est of the States to resume the powers they have dele- 
 gated. The same motives which led to the formation 
 of the Union, a conviction of its utility, are as strong 
 now that its beneficial effects have been experienced, 
 as when they were only anticipated. They have 
 evinced from the period of its formation, no sentiment 
 so stroDff, as an ardent and devoted attachment to the 
 Union. In Union, they take their high station among 
 the nations of the earth; and in Union, the Star 
 Spangled Banner waves over every sea. But there 
 is a principle we should never forget, that the greatest 
 good when perverted becomes the greatest evil. The 
 Union as it was formed — an Union of Free, Sovereign 
 and Independent States — an Union, affording equal 
 protection and mutual benefit to all, will be consider- 
 ed the greatest political good ; but as highly as it ought 
 to be valued, it is not the greatest possible good. 
 There is one still better — still more precious — one 
 which is prized infinitely higher — it is liberty — that 
 
 * Usurp. — AH power to govern is delegated or usurped. 
 The delegated power may Usurp other powers not delegated, 
 but the power that delegates cannot Usurp, it resumes the 
 power it has delegated — delegated power is trust. The Trustees, 
 therefore, that is the General Government, Usurp. The States, 
 who granted the trust, resume. 
 
12 
 
 liberty for which our Fathers toiled and bled. The 
 usurpations and tyranny of Great Britain were not re- 
 sisted, that the colonies might be united, but that 
 the colonies might be free, and for the people to 
 be free, the states must be free. Whenever the 
 States cease to maintain their Sovereignty unimpar- 
 ed, and become vassals of the Genera] Government, 
 the duration of the Union will then, indeed, be proble- 
 matical. It is, therefore, on the friends of the State 
 Rights — on the supporters of State Rights — on those 
 who cling to State Rights, as to the palladium of their 
 liberties, that we must rely for the maintenance and 
 perpetuity of the Union, and not on the enemies of 
 State Rights.* The weak— the timid — the apathe- 
 tic, and the ambitious, who raise the cry of disunion 
 to palsy the unity of action, that would emancipate 
 us from the chains of usurpation — these are the real 
 disunionists, and to these and these only, will be attri- 
 
 * Slate Rights. — There is a test by which the real State Right 
 Party may at once be distinguished from the counterfeit, who 
 assume their name to conquer under false colours. The real 
 State Right Party hold as their Cardinal Doctrine that, as 
 guardian of its reserved rights, each State is the judge for itself, 
 of an infringement of them; that there is, under the Union, a 
 peaceable mode of redress, when the Constitution has been 
 violated, and that every State is bound by a political neces- 
 sity to maintain its Sovereignty unimpaired, as essential to 
 the liberty of the people, and preservation of the Union. 
 
13 
 
 buted, the evils arising from the dissolution of ihe 
 Union. 
 
 Q. What is the new version of the Constitution by 
 Messrs. Webster fy Co. ? 
 
 A. They have discovered that the Constitution was 
 not formed by the States in their Sovereign capacity — 
 that it is not a compact between the States — but that 
 it is a Government formed by the people, en masse, 
 that is, by the people collected into one nation — that 
 this nation brought the Government into existence — 
 established it, and hath hitherto supported it for the 
 very purpose, among others, of imposing certain salu- 
 tary restraints on State Sovereignties. That in form- 
 ing this National Government, the people conferred 
 upon the Supreme Court, the power of imposing these 
 certain salutary restraints upon the Sovereignty of the 
 States. 
 
 Q. To what do these Doctrines lead ? 
 
 A. To the annihilation of State Rights, and con- 
 sequently, of the fundamental principles of Constitu- 
 tional Liberty, for which our Fathers fought and con- 
 quered. 
 
14 
 
 Q. How did they contrive to convert the people of 
 thirteen distinct States into one people ? 
 
 A. A short analysis of the process by which a 
 State is formed, will demonstrate the impossibility. 
 The discussion of the elements of Government is dull, 
 as is all abstract discussion. But if we undertake to 
 talk politics, we must undertake to know about what 
 we talk, and we cannot understand the nature of our 
 Government, without referring to first principles. 
 
 Q. By what process are States formed? 
 
 A. There are but two conditions of mankind — the 
 one national, and the other artificial. In a state of 
 nature, there is no government. The laws of nature 
 are the only rules of human conduct, and/each indivi- 
 dual is his own expounder of those laws. He is the 
 arbiter of his own rights, and the avenger of his own 
 wrongs. There is no power (that is, no moral power) 
 in one man to direct, control, or govern another; all 
 are equally free. The evils inseparable from this 
 condition, induce those who are suffering from it to 
 escape to the artificial state. The transition from a 
 state of nature to that of civil society, is effected by 
 an agreement among all who compose the society, 
 that each and his concerns, shall be directed by the 
 understanding, and protected by the power of all. 
 
15 
 
 The agreement is reciprocal. The right which eack 
 man possessed, in a state of nature, to direct himself, 
 is voluntarily surrendered by him to the society, and 
 he agrees, that he and his concerns shall henceforth 
 be subject to the will of the society. This contract is 
 either expressed or understood. The power to gov- 
 ern can be obtained upon no other supposition. It is 
 denominated the social compact. It is the charter by 
 which civil society is incorporated, by which it ac- 
 quires personality and unity ; by which the action of 
 all the people, is considered as the action of a moral 
 agent, of a single person. This moral agent is, in 
 reference to its own condition, called a state, proba- 
 bly, from the fixed and stable condition of the people, 
 compared with their unstable and fluctuating condi- 
 tion in a state of nature. The people compressed or 
 compacted by the social compact into the unit, called 
 a State, remains unchanged under all the changes of 
 its Government, which accident may produce, or war 
 or convulsion may inflict. If a Republic becomes a 
 Monarchy, or a Monarchy a Republic, or if compacts 
 are formed with other States, these are but changes 
 of Government, the Civil Society or State remains 
 unchanged, and is Sovereign, while ever it manages 
 its own affairs by its own will. It is upon this prin- 
 ciple that States are not absolved from their debts by 
 revolution. The State and not the Government is 
 the contracting party, and nothing but the dissolution 
 
16 
 
 61* the social compact and consequent extinction of 
 the State, can absolve it from its payment. Much 
 confusion has arisen from the indiscriminate use of 
 the word State. State means the people in their 
 political capacity, and never their government. By 
 this reference to first principles, we find from the ex- 
 isting state of things — as there were thirteen distinct 
 States at the time the Constitution was formed — that 
 it must of necessity have been formed by the States, 
 not by the people consolidated into one nation, for in 
 no other way could they have been collected into one, 
 but by first absolving themselves from their allegi- 
 ance to their respective States, and dissolving the 
 compacts by which they were formed into States. 
 Civil Societies have been destroyed by earthquakes, 
 by deluge, and by the exterminating ravages of war ; 
 they have often been subdued into vassalage or reduc- 
 ed by usurpation to the condition of provinces, but we 
 have no account in history of a people voluntarily dis- 
 solving the social compact. Messrs. Webster & Co's. 
 discovery, therefore, is a proof that there is no absur- 
 dity too great for those who are determined to accom- 
 plish their views on particular subjects. 
 
 Q. Does not the Supreme Court also contend thai 
 the Constitution was formed by the people , collectively '? 
 
17 
 
 A. The Supreme Court is the creature of the Ge- 
 neral Government, and has with a constancy and si- 
 lence, like the approaches of death, adhered to a con- 
 struction that has increased its own power — enlarged 
 that of the General Government, and thrown chains 
 over State Rights — chains never dreamed of at the 
 formation of the Constitution. 
 
 Q. Upon 'what docs the Supreme Court and Messrs. 
 Webster 8f Co. found their discovery? 
 
 A. Upon the preamble to the Constitution — it is in 
 these words: "Wc the people of the United States. 
 to form a more perfect Union," &c. 
 
 To people of common understanding, black actu- 
 ally means black, and white really white; but to 
 Messrs, Webster & Co. it means just the reverse. 
 " We the people of the United States" means accord- 
 ing to them — " We the people no* of the United States, 
 but the people collectively." 
 
 Q. When the States formed the Constitution, under 
 ibhich kind of government were they? 
 
 A. They were united by the Confederation. To 
 form a more perfect Union of the States already unit- 
 ed, to consolidate their Union, was the object of* the 
 present Constitution, and not to unite the people, for 
 it was impossible to unite them more perfectly by £ 
 
IS 
 
 Constitution than they were already umted by the so- 
 cial compact. 
 
 Q. What is the nature of the Supreme Court, that 
 porting to Messrs. Webster * Co. has the P oJ" 
 -tumg salutary restraints upon State Sovereignty? 
 
 A. The epithet of s „p reme which gives importance 
 
 vS h m ,mPOrtS 0n,y that aPPel,atl ™ N*h 
 he A I m 7; XetC ' Se °™ *» -"ordinate Courts of 
 
 court ; / Gm rr nu Ti,e a ^ u ™ c «««. «r 
 
 Com of Appeals of every State, is just as supreme 
 
 Ive, ^ T- T""* alS ° 6XereiseS J" risd -«ion 
 ove, hemfermr Courts. It i s not called supreme, 
 m reference to the other departments of the Govern- 
 
 sTmerVr '* a " y SUPlemaCy ^ refCTe " Ce to *• 
 Ittthe,! PO "T, aCC ° rded " * Prejudicial. 
 
 , 1 f T a11 cases of law and •*** --- 
 
 ». .de. the Const.tuhon. But questions of sovereignty 
 policy, or expediency, are unsusceptible of its jud.c al' 
 cogmzanceanddecision. The power to declare a W 
 of Congress, or any of the States, unconstitutional 
 was never mtended to be conferred on the Supreme 
 Court as a rhreet power. The exercise of the JZ 
 
 r ed in decdn/the .a^lu^^ 
 
 •owt the decision must be <ri veil ; n th» « v 
 
 & iven in the exercise of 
 
19 
 
 merely judicial; and not of political power. Can 
 believed that the great men who framed the Consftu- 
 tion, and guarded each specification with such zeal- 
 ous care, ever intended to subject the whole to he 
 control of a judicial Oligarchy 1 The power asserted 
 forthe Supreme Court, is superior to that of impenal 
 Rome in her proudest days. The conquests of Rome 
 were achieved at an incalculable expense of blood and 
 treasure. But the Supreme Court may vassal twenty- 
 four Sovereign States, without expending one cent or 
 shedding one drop of blood. 
 
 If the States were but true to themselves, and tait «- 
 ful in the discharge of their high duties, they would 
 move on in the majesty of their sovereign power, and 
 maintain with a steady and equal hand both then Go- 
 vernments within its appropriate sphere, am not pel - 
 mit * e mere modicum of judical power which they 
 have granted to the Supreme Court, to control them 
 in the exercise of their sovereign power. 
 
 Q. Why have the States allowed the Constitution, 
 the saered legacy of the combined wisdom of their 
 fathers, to he violated by sacrilegious hands? 
 
 A. Because that self interest is the governing prin- 
 ciple of three-fourths of mankind. The North, East 
 and West acquiesced in the usurpation of the General 
 Government, because it was for their exclusive bene- 
 fit while the South was passive through apathy and 
 
20 
 
 sleep. The North and East bribed the West by ma 
 ternal improvement, and by donations of the public 
 lands — and the West in her turn, bribed the North and 
 East with the Tariff. Internal improvement and a 
 Tariff of protection, are twin born abominations un- 
 known to the Constitution. The South, whose vital 
 interests and almost her existence depended on the 
 inviolability of the Constitution, scarcely awakened 
 from her dream of sovereignty, finds herself the vassal 
 province of a Consolidated Central Government, with- 
 out limitation to its power, but the will of the majority 
 to legislate for the general welfare — the very govern- 
 ment by usurpation, that the Supreme Court and 
 Messrs. Webster &. Co. discovered was established by 
 the people. The usurped power is a virtual abroga- 
 tion of the Constitution, and consequently leaves the 
 minority to ruin and degradation. This minority is 
 the South. 
 
 Q. What is the remedy for these evils, according to 
 the submission men, [or Tories of the Revolution!] 
 
 A. To shut our eyes — hold our tongues, and fold 
 our arms. 
 
 Q. What is the greatest anomaly at present in the 
 Union ? 
 
 A. It is, that the South, whose beau ideal was Li- 
 berty, who sacrificed to it as to the God of their ido- 
 
21 
 
 latry, is now in vassalage to the North, East and 
 West. 
 
 Q. To what may the patriotism of many here be 
 likened ? 
 
 A. To the philanthropists, whose charity is too ex- 
 alted to relieve the misery at their own door, hut are 
 willing to bestow it on three-quarters of the globe. 
 
 Q. What is the feeling that Carolina's real sons 
 cherish for her at this moment ? 
 
 A. That feeling so touchingly and beautifully ex- 
 pressed by the Beaufort Orator on the last anniversa- 
 ry of independence. " If, in celebrations like this, the 
 name of Carolina was uninentioned by her Orators, 
 the omission was altogether unmarked — why was it 
 when now you can think only of her ? It was, because 
 she had not yet been depressed into notorious inequa- 
 lity from the level of the majority of her Sister States. 
 She was not yet in full possession of that deepest and 
 most touching attractiveness, with which misfortune 
 and the world's persecution never fail to invest a be- 
 loved object in the contemplation of the generous and 
 brave ; you had not yet felt in the cold and cutting 
 blast of federal unkindness the necessity of cherish- 
 ing and warming her in your hearts. She had been 
 prosperous and affluent, and you but rejoiced that she 
 was vour State — she had been honoured — and you 
 
w ere but proud of her, as your section of the Union ; 
 but when she was injured and insulted, we felt that 
 she was our country ! And when she was most inso- 
 lently trampled, we clung to her most fondly, and 
 when they called her weakest, our hearts beat 
 strongest in her cause." 
 
 Q. What is the attitude Carolina should assume at 
 the present crisis? 
 
 A. She must at once appeal to her sovereignty, and 
 decide whether she shall herself exert the protecting 
 power of Nullification through the organs of her 
 Legislature, or assuming her highest attitude of sove- 
 reignty, through that of a Convention. 
 
 Q. What will be the result of this resistance on the 
 part of the State to the obnoxious usurpation? 
 
 A. The first result will be, the preservation of her 
 sovereignty— the next result, the General Government, 
 no longer relying on the supineness of the State, will 
 be driven back to the sphere of its legitimacy. 
 
 Q. But if one of these results should not folio to, 
 must the State forbear to resist the aggression upon 
 her rights? 
 
 A. No— decidedly no. She must maintain her 
 sovereignty at every hazard, and every means within 
 her power. She is good for nothing-worse than 
 *?ood for nothing— without it. 
 
23 
 
 Q. Will this not lead to civil war — to war between 
 the State, and the General Government ? 
 
 A. No: The General Government would not pul 
 itself so completely in the wrong, as to consecrate its 
 Usurpation by the blood of those it shall have attempt- 
 ed to oppress. If the State is led by apprehensions 
 of this kind to submit to oppression, there is then an 
 end of shaking off her fetters. Fear is a bad counsel- 
 lor of even an individual, it should never be consulted 
 by a Sovereign State. The strength and powers of 
 Usurpation consist wholly in the fear of resisting it. 
 Let the State only will to be free, and the General 
 Government must recede from its pretensions. 
 
 Q. But if the General Government does not recede ? 
 
 A. Then let the State send a solemn embassy to the 
 bar of Congress, and demand as a Sovereign State, 
 one of the parties to the compact, a redress of her 
 grievances, or an appeal to the ultimate arbiter, pro- 
 vided by the fifth article in the Constitution. Three- 
 fourths of the States compose this august tribunal.* 
 The State does not compromise her dignity, by refer- 
 ring to them questions of Sovereignty beino- them- 
 
 Thrce-f our ths. -It has been said in a late State Paper, Hint the States by 
 assenting' to the provision of the Constitution, that three-fourths of them 
 might amend or change it, sunendered individually their original Sove- 
 reignty, and that the Sovereignty of the Union actually now resides in three- 
 fourths of them. This is an erroneous opinion. The States agreed that the 
 ■voice of all should be expressed by three-fourths, there was no surrend 
 individual Sovereignty. 
 
24 
 
 selves Sovereign, but she cannot without violating 
 every principle of self-respect, submit a question in 
 relation to her sovereignty to one of her subalterns, 
 the Supreme Court. It is in the power of this tribu- 
 nal to define anew the relations between the State 
 and the General Government; if it does not concur in 
 admitting the contested power, or shall not pronounce 
 that it already exists, the General Government will at 
 once be constrained to abandon the exercise of it, for 
 no new power could have been granted without the 
 concurrence of this tribunal. 
 
 Q. But if three-fourths of the States, the ultimate 
 arbiter, decide the question against the State, whose 
 vital interest is at stake, does acquiescence become a 
 duty ? 
 
 A. The State must then calculate the value of the 
 Union ; she has always the right of secession, but we 
 will not, even in idea, " fathom the abyss, until we 
 have descended the precipice of disunion." 
 
 Q. On whom must Carolina depend in her hour of 
 peril ? 
 
 On the descendants of the patriot band who achiev- 
 ed the Revolution. On the descendants of those brave 
 and generous foreigners who united with us in that 
 arduous and glorious struggle. On the proprietors of 
 the soil — and on those whose motto is " millions for 
 
 DEFENCE, NOT A CENT FOR TRIBUTE." 
 
 x.J'w*