historicaldocuments:notes-on-nullification-madison
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
historicaldocuments:notes-on-nullification-madison [2019/09/15 12:06] – Oliver Wolcott | historicaldocuments:notes-on-nullification-madison [2019/09/15 12:32] – Oliver Wolcott | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 115: | Line 115: | ||
It remains however for the nullifying expositors to specify the right &. mode of interposition, | It remains however for the nullifying expositors to specify the right &. mode of interposition, | ||
- | They can not say that the right meant was a Constl. right to resist the Constitutional authy: for that is a contradiction in terms, as much as a legal right to resist a law. | + | <wrap hi>They can not say that the right meant was a Constl. right to resist the Constitutional authy: for that is a contradiction in terms, as much as a legal right to resist a law.</ |
- | They can find no middle ground, between a natural and a Constitutional right, on which a right of nullifying interposition can be placed; and it is curious to observe the awkwardness of the attempt, by the most ingenious advocates (Upsher & Berrian) | + | **They can find no middle ground, between a natural and a Constitutional right, on which a right of nullifying interposition can be placed;** and it is curious to observe the awkwardness of the attempt, by the most ingenious advocates (Upsher & Berrian) |
- | They will not rest the claim as modified by S. C. for that that has scarce an advocate out of the State, and owes the remnant of its popularity there to the disguise under which it is now kept alive; some of the leaders of the party admitting its indefensibility in its naked shape. | + | They will not rest the claim as modified by S. C. for that that has scarce an advocate out of the State, and owes the remnant of its popularity there to the disguise under which it is now kept alive; some of the leaders of the party admitting its **indefensibility** in its naked shape. |
- | The result is that the Nullifiers, instead of proving that the Resoln. meant nullification, | + | <wrap hi>The result is that the Nullifiers, instead of proving that the Resoln. meant nullification, |
- | |||
It appears from this comment, that the right asserted & exercised by the Legislature, | It appears from this comment, that the right asserted & exercised by the Legislature, | ||
Line 129: | Line 128: | ||
It appears still further that the efficacious interposition contemplated by the Legislature; | It appears still further that the efficacious interposition contemplated by the Legislature; | ||
- | It appears that the Legislature expressly | + | It appears that the Legislature expressly |
It appears that the object to be attained by the invited co-operation with Virgina, was, as expressed in the 3d. & 7th. Resol: to maintain within the several States their respective auths. rights & liberties, which could not be constitutionally different in different States, nor inconsistent with a sameness in the Authy. & laws of the U. S. in all & in each. | It appears that the object to be attained by the invited co-operation with Virgina, was, as expressed in the 3d. & 7th. Resol: to maintain within the several States their respective auths. rights & liberties, which could not be constitutionally different in different States, nor inconsistent with a sameness in the Authy. & laws of the U. S. in all & in each. | ||
Line 141: | Line 140: | ||
What the effect might have been if Virga had remained patient & silent, and still more if she had sided with S. Carolina, in favor of the Alien & Sedition acts, can be but a matter of conjecture. | What the effect might have been if Virga had remained patient & silent, and still more if she had sided with S. Carolina, in favor of the Alien & Sedition acts, can be but a matter of conjecture. | ||
- | What would have been thought of her if she had recommended the nullifying project of S. C. may be estimated, by the reception given to it under factitious | + | What would have been thought of her if she had recommended the nullifying project of S. C. may be estimated, by the reception given to it under __factitious |
It has been sufficiently shewn from the language of the Report as has been seen, that the right in the States to interpose declarations & protests, agst. unconstitutional acts of Congress, had been denied; and that the reasoning in the Resolutions, | It has been sufficiently shewn from the language of the Report as has been seen, that the right in the States to interpose declarations & protests, agst. unconstitutional acts of Congress, had been denied; and that the reasoning in the Resolutions, | ||
Line 175: | Line 174: | ||
Yes it may be safely admitted that every right has its remedy; as it must be admitted that the remedy under the Constitution lies where it has been marked out by the Constitution; | Yes it may be safely admitted that every right has its remedy; as it must be admitted that the remedy under the Constitution lies where it has been marked out by the Constitution; | ||
- | It is painful to be obliged to notice such a Sophism as that by which this inference, is assailed. Because an unconstitutional law is no law, it is alledged that it may be constitutionally disobeyed by all who think it unconstitutional. The fallacy is so obvious that it can impose on none but the most biassed or heedless observers. It makes no distinction where the distinction is obvious, and essential, between the case of a law confessedly unconstitutional, | + | __It is painful to be obliged to notice such a Sophism as that by which this inference, is assailed. Because an unconstitutional law is no law, it is alledged that it may be constitutionally disobeyed by all who think it unconstitutional.__ **The fallacy is so obvious that it can impose on none but the most biassed or heedless observers.** It makes no distinction where the distinction is obvious, and essential, between the case of a law confessedly unconstitutional, |
The main pillar of Nullification is the assumption that Sovereignty is a unit, at once indivisible & unalienable; | The main pillar of Nullification is the assumption that Sovereignty is a unit, at once indivisible & unalienable; | ||
Line 181: | Line 180: | ||
But is it not the Constn. itself, necessarily the offspring of a Sovn. Authy? What but the highest pol: Authy. a sovereign Authy: could make such a Constn.; a Constn. wch. makes a Govt. a Govt. which makes laws; laws which operate likes the laws of all other Govts, by a penal & physical force, on the individuals subject to the laws; and finally laws declared to be the supreme law of the land; any thing in the Constn. or laws of the individual State notwithstanding. | But is it not the Constn. itself, necessarily the offspring of a Sovn. Authy? What but the highest pol: Authy. a sovereign Authy: could make such a Constn.; a Constn. wch. makes a Govt. a Govt. which makes laws; laws which operate likes the laws of all other Govts, by a penal & physical force, on the individuals subject to the laws; and finally laws declared to be the supreme law of the land; any thing in the Constn. or laws of the individual State notwithstanding. | ||
- | And where does the Sovy. which makes such a Constn. reside? | + | And where does the Sovy. which makes such a Constn. reside? |
In like manner, the Constns. of the States, made by the people, as separated into States, were made by a sovereign Authy, by a Sovereignty residing in each of the States, to the extent of the objects embraced by their respective Constitutions. And if the States be thus sovereign tho’ shorne of so many of the essential attributes of Sovereignty, | In like manner, the Constns. of the States, made by the people, as separated into States, were made by a sovereign Authy, by a Sovereignty residing in each of the States, to the extent of the objects embraced by their respective Constitutions. And if the States be thus sovereign tho’ shorne of so many of the essential attributes of Sovereignty, |
historicaldocuments/notes-on-nullification-madison.txt · Last modified: 2021/02/23 16:15 by 127.0.0.1