Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

unimpaired, all the rights of the People and Government of this State, conferred upon it by the Constitution of the State, and of the United States-find itself reluctlantly constrained to enter its most solemn protest against the usurpations of the General Government as described in the report of its committeeTherefore,

1. Resolved, That this General Assembly, in behalf of the People and Government of this State, does, hereby, most solemnly protest against the claim or exercise of any power whatever, on the part of the General Government, to make internal improvements within the limits and jurisdiction of the several States, and particularly within the limits of the State of Virginia ;—and also, against the claim or exercise of any power whatever, asserting or involving a jurisdiction over any part of the territory within the limits of this State, except over the objects and in the mode specified in the Constitution of the United States. [House, 134 to 47; Senate, 15 to 7.]

2. Resolved, in like manner, that this General Assembly does hereby, most solemnly protest against any claim or exercise of power, whatever, on the part of the General Government, which serves to draw money from the inhabitants of this State, into the Treasury of the United States, and to disburse it for any object whatever, except for carrying into effect the grants of power to the General Government, contained in the Constitution of the United States. [House, 159 to 19; Senate, 18 to 4.]

3. Resolved, in like manner, that this General Assembly does most solemnly protest against the claim or exercise of any power, whatever, on the part of the General Government, to protect domestic manufactures, the protection of manufactures not being amongst the grants of power to that Government, specified in the Constitution of the United States;-and also, against the operations of the act of Congress, passed May 22d, 1824, entitled, "An act to amend the several acts imposing duties on imports," generally called the tariff law, which vary the distribution of the proceeds of the labor of the community, in such a manner, as to transfer property from one portion of the United States to another and to take private property from the owner for the benefit of another person, not rendering public service:-as unconstitu

tional, unwise, unjust, unequal and oppressive. [House, 132 to 49; Senate, 14 to 8.]

[Acts of Virginia, 1826-27, 135, 136.]

68.

South Carolina and the Harrisburg Convention.

December 19, 1827.

The failure of the tariff bill of 1827, by the casting vote of Calhoun, led to renewed efforts by the protectionists, which culminated in the Harrisburg Convention of the Friends of Domestic Industry, which was in session July 30 to Aug. 3, 1827. It addressed a memorial to Congress, and through committees issued several addresses upon the commercial and economic conditions of the country, with a view to influencing legislation in favor of protection. (Minutes of Proceedings, Niles, XXXII, 388, 395; Memorial to Congress, Ibid., 395–396; Addresses of Committees, Ibid., XXXIII, 100–112, 123–128, 138-144, 149-160, 171-176, 188-192, 203-207. See also Amer. Annual Reg., 1827-29, 39-41; Taussig, 82-85; McMaster, V, 245-247, 249-251; Elliott, 239-242.) The increased demands and activities of the protectionists aroused emphatic protests from the South. A popular agitation in South Carolina, in which Dr. Cooper was prominent, found expression in the adoption of Memorials by citizens in various parts of the State addressed to the State Legislature and to Congress. (Niles XXXIII, 26–32; McMaster, 247– 249 (Cooper's speech); Elliott, 244-249; Houston, chs. III and IV.) These condemned a protective tariff in strong language. One such declared, we exist as a member of the Union merely as an object of taxation," and called upon the State Legislature "to devise some means of freeing your fellow citizens from a yoke too heavy to be borne." Congress was warned that the inequalities and injustices of this state of things is becoming too glaring to remain unnoticed, and the burthens it imposes on us is too heavy to be borne in silence any longer." (Niles, XXXIII, 59, 60.) Governor John Tayler, in his message at the opening of the Legislature in November, 1827, called attention to the schemes of the Harrisburg Convention, and to the petitions and remonstrances of the people. (Ibid., 232.) A Special Committee presented an elaborate report and resolutions. The former announced "that the period has arrived when remonstrance is not only proper, but its neglect would be a crime; seems to be the voice of South Carolina." The resolutions follow. The text of report and resolution are in Acts of South Carolina, 1827 28, 69-78; House Doc., 20 Cong., 1 sess., 1827-28, III, No. 65; Senate Doc., II, No. 29; Amer. State Papers, Finance, V, 724-730; see also Amer. Annual Reg., 1827-29, I, pt. II, 136, 137; Niles, XXXIII, 275; McMaster, V, 252.

1. Resolved, That the Constitution of the United States is a compact between the people of the different States with each

145] SOUTH CAROLINA AND HARRISBURG CONVENTION

13

other, as separate, independent sovereignties;1 and that for any violation of the letter or spirit of that compact by the Congress of the United States, it is not only the right of the people, but of the Legislatures, who represent them to every extent not limited, to remonstrate against violations of the fundamental compact.

2. Resolved, That the acts of Congress, known by the name of Tariff Laws, the object of which is not the raising of revenues, or the regulation of foreign commerce, but the promotion of domestic manufactures, are violations of the Constitution in its spirit, and ought to be repealed.

3. Resolved, That Congress has no power to construct roads and canals in the States, for the purpose of internal improvement, with or without the assent of the States in whose limits those internal improvements are made; the authority of Congress extending no further than to pass the "necessary and proper laws" to cairy into execution their enumerated powers.

4. Resolved, That the American Colonization Society is not an object of national interest, and that Congress has no power in any way to patronise, or direct appropriations for the benefit of this or any other society.

5. Resolved, That our Senators in Congress be instructed, and our Representatives requested, to continue to oppose every increase of the Tariff, with a view to protect domestic manufactures, and all appropriations to the purposes of internal improvements of the United States, and all appropriations in favor of the Colonization Society, or the patronage of the same, either directly or indirectly, by the General Government. [Resolutions of transmission.]

66

1 The report preceding the resolutions combats the view that the Federal Constitution emanated from the people, as "one of the most dangerous doctrines that can be promulgated," and takes issue with the opinion of the U. S. Supreme Court in the case of McCulloch vs. Maryland on this point. They also declare that collisions will sometimes arise between the States and Congress, when it would not only be unwise, but even unsafe, to submit questions of disputed sovereignty to any judiciary tribunal;" "least of all ought the States to consent to make the Supreme Court of the United States the arbiter finally to decide points of vital importance to the States."

69.

Extract from the Report of Georgia on the
Tariff and Internal Improvements.

December 24, 1827.

Governor Troup in his message of Nov. 6, 1827, recommended the Legislature to adopt a "firm remonstrance" to Congress, and if this should be "unheeded" to address "the States having common interest with yourselves, and to suggest the expediency of concurring in a non-consumption agreement to be carried into effect by all the means which are constitutionally given to their respective legislatures." (Niles, XXXIII, 221, 222.) Acting upon the suggestion the Legislature adopted an argumentative report, presented by Judge Clayton, extracts from which follow. Text, Acts of Georgia, 1827, 203-214; House Doc., 20 Cong., 1 sess., III, No. 120; Amer. State Papers, Finance, V, 852-857; Niles, XXXIII, 325-328; Amer. Annual Reg., 1827– 29, I, pt. II, 140.

The Committee are aware that it is assumed by the General Government, as expressed in the decisions of the Federal Court, that State Legislatures have no right to complain of its usurpations, however formidable or fatal. That the General Government is said to be "truly and emphatically a Government of the People," and, therefore, entirely out of the reach of representative bodies, whose sole duty it is to keep within the sphere of their own delegated trust. It would seem that, if even such a pretension were admissible, it should be considered no great breach of decorum, for a sovereign State, through its heighest known authority, to approach a Government it had contributed to establish, with a subject of complaint, especially, when it is perceived that much inferior bodies are patiently listened to, and listened to with effect. While mauufacturing companies and self-created delegates, pretending to represent whole States, assemble for the purpose of directing the Congress what measures they must adopt, surely the Legislature of a State, without much violence to any known rule of modesty, may respectfully offer a counter remonstrance to such a growing temper of dictation. But it is not in this humble manner that your Committee would recommend the Legislature to prefer their just complaints to the General Government. They claim it as a right to remonstrate with that Government on all measues which they may conceive violative of the fundamental principles of its institutions. They affirm that

those who create a delegated Government, have lawfully the power to restrain it within its proper bounds, and maintain the doctine asserted by Luther Martin, in his address to the Legislature of Maryland at the time of the adoption of the Federal Constitution, that "the proper constituents of the General Government are the States, and the States are to that Government what the People are to the States; that, this is entirely within the spirit and intention of the Federal Union."

[ocr errors]

[Here follows a lengthy argument in support of the view "that the terms of the grant, in the Federal Constitution, did not convey sovereign powers generally, but sovereign power limited to particular cases, and with restrictive means for executing such powers;' and further, that the powers were delegated, not by the People of United States at large, but by the People of the respective States; and that, therefore, it was a compact between the different States;" and that the Legislature is the guardian of the rights of the people from the encroachments of the General Government. This is supplemented by an elaborate argument in support of strict construction. The report concludes as

follows:]

The Committee are fully sensible that every degree of moderation is due to the question, upon which they have founded the present serious complaint; but they owe it to truth and sincerity to say, that it is their decided opinion an increase of Tariff duties will and ought to be RESISTED by all legal and constitutional means, so as to avert the crying injustice of such an unconstituional measure.

They are constrained, too, to say, that this State ought to oppose, in every possible shape, the exercise of the power, on the part of the General Government, to encourage domestic manufactures or to promote internal improvement. They will not pretend, at present, to recommend the mode of OPPOSITION; but they will recommend the peaceable course of remonstrating with Congress on the subject, and of asking of that body to pause before it proceeds any further in measures that must inevitably destroy the affection of some of the States for the General Government. It will detract nothing from the firmness or wisdom of the Congress to listen to the voice of State Legislatures, while it is considering the memorials of manufacturing companies.

« ZurückWeiter »