CHAPTER LXXIX.

PROCLAMATION AGAINST NULLIFICATION.

The ordinance of nullification reached President Jackson in

the first days of December, and on the tenth of that month the

proclamation was issued, of which the following are the essential

and leading parts:

"Whereas a convention assembled in the State of South Carolina

have passed an ordinance, by which they declare 'that the

several acts and parts of acts of the Congress of the United

States, purporting to be laws for the imposing of duties and

imposts on the importation of foreign commodities, and now

having actual operation and effect within the United States,

and more especially' two acts for the same purposes, passed

on the 29th of May, 1828, and on the 14th of July, 1832, 'are

unauthorized by the constitution of the United States, and

violate the true meaning and intent thereof, and are null and

void, and no law,' nor binding on the citizens of that State, or

its officers: and by the said ordinance, it is further declared

to be unlawful for any of the constituted authorities of the

State or of the United States to enforce the payment of the

duties imposed by the said acts within the same State, and that

it is the duty of the legislature to pass such laws as may be

necessary to give full effect to the said ordinance:

"And whereas, by the said ordinance, it is further ordained,

that in no case of law or equity decided in the courts of said

State, wherein shall be drawn in question the validity of the

said ordinance, or of the acts of the legislature that may be

passed to give it effect, or of the said laws of the United

States, no appeal shall be allowed to the Supreme Court of the

United States, nor shall any copy of the record be permitted or

allowed for that purpose, and that any person attempting to take

such appeal shall be punished as for a contempt of court:

"And, finally, the said ordinance declares that the people of

South Carolina will maintain the said ordinance at every hazard;

and that they will consider the passage of any act, by Congress,

abolishing or closing the ports of the said State, or otherwise

obstructing the free ingress or egress of vessels to and from

the said ports, or any other act of the federal government to

coerce the State, shut up her ports, destroy or harass her

commerce, or to enforce the said acts otherwise than through the

civil tribunals of the country, as inconsistent with the longer

continuance of South Carolina in the Union; and that the people

of the said State will thenceforth hold themselves absolved from

all further obligation to maintain or preserve their political

connection with the people of the other States, and will

forthwith proceed to organize a separate government, and do all

other acts and things which sovereign and independent States may

of right do:

"And whereas the said ordinance prescribes to the people of

South Carolina a course of conduct in direct violation of their

duty as citizens of the United States, contrary to the laws

of their country, subversive of its constitution, and having

for its object the destruction of the Union--that Union which,

coeval with our political existence, led our fathers, without

any other ties to unite them than those of patriotism and a

common cause, through a sanguinary struggle to a glorious

independence--that sacred Union, hitherto inviolate, which,

perfected by our happy constitution, has brought us, by

the favor of Heaven, to a state of prosperity at home, and

high consideration abroad, rarely, if ever, equalled in the

history of nations: To preserve this bond of our political

existence from destruction, to maintain inviolate this state of

national honor and prosperity, and to justify the confidence

my fellow-citizens have reposed in me, I, Andrew Jackson,

President of the United States, have thought proper to issue

this my proclamation, stating my views of the constitution

and laws applicable to the measures adopted by the convention

of South Carolina, and to the reasons they have put forth to

sustain them, declaring the course which duty will require me to

pursue, and, appealing to the understanding and patriotism of

the people, warn them of the consequences that must inevitably

result from an observance of the dictates of the convention.

"Strict duty would require of me nothing more than the exercise

of those powers with which I am now, or may hereafter be,

invested, for preserving the peace of the Union, and for

the execution of the laws. But the imposing aspect which

opposition has assumed in this case, by clothing itself with

State authority, and the deep interest which the people of the

United States must all feel in preventing a resort to stronger

measures, while there is a hope that any thing will be yielded

to reasoning and remonstrance, perhaps demanded, and will

certainly justify, a full exposition to South Carolina and the

nation of the views I entertain of this important question, as

well as a distinct enunciation of the course which my sense of

duty will require me to pursue.

"The ordinance is founded, not on the indefeasible right of

resisting acts which are plainly unconstitutional and too

oppressive to be endured, but on the strange position that any

one State may not only declare an act of Congress void, but

prohibit its execution; that they may do this consistently

with the constitution; that the true construction of that

instrument permits a State to retain its place in the Union,

and yet be bound by no other of its laws than those it may

choose to consider as constitutional. It is true, they add,

that to justify this abrogation of a law, it must be palpably

contrary to the constitution; but it is evident, that to give

the right of resisting laws of that description, coupled

with the uncontrolled right to decide what laws deserve that

character, is to give the power of resisting all laws. For as,

by the theory, there is no appeal, the reasons alleged by the

State, good or bad, must prevail. If it should be said that

public opinion is a sufficient check against the abuse of this

power, it may be asked why it is not deemed a sufficient guard

against the passage of an unconstitutional act by Congress.

There is, however, a restraint in this last case, which makes

the assumed power of a State more indefensible, and which

does not exist in the other. There are two appeals from an

unconstitutional act passed by Congress--one to the judiciary,

the other to the people and the States. There is no appeal from

the State decision in theory, and the practical illustration

shows that the courts are closed against an application to

review it, both judges and jurors being sworn to decide in its

favor. But reasoning on this subject is superfluous, when our

social compact, in express terms, declares that the laws of

the United States, its constitution, and treaties made under

it, are the supreme law of the land; and, for greater caution,

adds 'that the judges in every State shall be bound thereby,

any thing in the constitution or laws of any State to the

contrary notwithstanding.' And it may be asserted without fear

of refutation, that no federative government could exist without

a similar provision. Look for a moment to the consequence. If

South Carolina considers the revenue laws unconstitutional,

and has a right to prevent their execution in the port of

Charleston, there would be a clear constitutional objection to

their collection in every other port, and no revenue could be

collected any where; for all imposts must be equal. It is no

answer to repeat, that an unconstitutional law is no law, so

long as the question of its legality is to be decided by the

State itself; for every law operating injuriously upon any local

interest will be perhaps thought, and certainly represented, as

unconstitutional, and, as has been shown, there is no appeal.

"If this doctrine had been established at an earlier day, the

Union would have been dissolved in its infancy. The excise law

in Pennsylvania, the embargo and non-intercourse law in the

Eastern States, the carriage tax in Virginia, were all deemed

unconstitutional, and were more unequal in their operation than

any of the laws now complained of; but fortunately none of

those States discovered that they had the right now claimed by

South Carolina. The war, into which we were forced to support

the dignity of the nation and the rights of our citizens, might

have ended in defeat and disgrace, instead of victory and honor,

if the States who supposed it a ruinous and unconstitutional

measure, had thought they possessed the right of nullifying

the act by which it was declared, and denying supplies for

its prosecution. Hardly and unequally as those measures bore

upon several members of the Union, to the legislatures of none

did this efficient and peaceable remedy, as it is called,

suggest itself. The discovery of this important feature in our

constitution was reserved to the present day. To the statesmen

of South Carolina belongs the invention, and upon the citizens

of that State will unfortunately fall the evils of reducing it

to practice.

"If the doctrine of a State veto upon the laws of the Union

carries with it internal evidence of its impracticable

absurdity, our constitutional history will also afford abundant

proof that it would have been repudiated with indignation had it

been proposed to form a feature in our government.

"In our colonial state, although dependent on another power, we

very early considered ourselves as connected by common interest

with each other. Leagues were formed for common defence, and,

before the declaration of independence, we were known in our

aggregate character as the United Colonies of America. That

decisive and important step was taken jointly. We declared

ourselves a nation by a joint, not by several acts, and when

the terms of our confederation were reduced to form, it was in

that of a solemn league of several States, by which they agreed

that they would collectively form one nation for the purpose

of conducting some certain domestic concerns and all foreign

relations. In the instrument forming that Union is found an

article which declares that 'every State shall abide by the

determinations of Congress on all questions which, by that

confederation, should be submitted to them.'

"Under the confederation, then, no State could legally annul

a decision of the Congress, or refuse to submit to its

execution; but no provision was made to enforce these decisions.

Congress made requisitions, but they were not complied with.

The government could not operate on individuals. They had no

judiciary, no means of collecting revenue.

"But the defects of the confederation need not be detailed.

Under its operation we could scarcely be called a nation. We

had neither prosperity at home, nor consideration abroad. This

state of things could not be endured, and our present happy

constitution was formed, but formed in vain, if this fatal

doctrine prevail. It was formed for important objects that are

announced in the preamble made in the name and by the authority

of the people of the United States, whose delegates framed,

and whose conventions approved it. The most important among

these objects, that which is placed first in rank, on which all

the others rest, is 'to form a more perfect Union.' Now, is it

possible that even if there were no express provision giving

supremacy to the constitution and laws of the United States over

those of the States--can it be conceived that an instrument made

for the purpose of 'forming a more perfect Union' than that of

the confederation, could be so constructed by the assembled

wisdom of our country, as to substitute for that confederation

a form of government dependent for its existence on the local

interest, the party spirit of a State, or of a prevailing

faction in a State? Every man of plain, unsophisticated

understanding, who hears the question, will give such an answer

as will preserve the Union. Metaphysical subtlety, in pursuit of

an impracticable theory, could alone have devised one that is

calculated to destroy it.

"The constitution declares that the judicial powers of the

United States extend to cases arising under the laws of the

United States, and that such laws, the constitution and treaties

shall be paramount to the State constitutions and laws. The

judiciary act prescribes the mode by which the case may be

brought before a court of the United States: by appeal, when

a State tribunal shall decide against this provision of the

constitution. The ordinance declares there shall be no appeal;

makes the State law paramount to the constitution and laws of

the United States; forces judges and jurors to swear that they

will disregard their provisions; and even makes it penal in a

suitor to attempt relief by appeal. It further declares that it

shall not be lawful for the authorities of the United States, or

of that State, to enforce the payment of duties imposed by the

revenue laws within its limits.

"Here is a law of the United States, not even pretended to be

unconstitutional, repealed by the authority of a small majority

of the voters of a single State. Here is a provision of the

constitution which is solemnly abrogated by the same authority.

"On such expositions and reasonings, the ordinance grounds not

only an assertion of the right to annul the laws of which it

complains, but to enforce it by a threat of seceding from the

Union, if any attempt is made to execute them.

"This right to secede is deduced from the nature of the

constitution, which, they say, is a compact between sovereign

States, who have preserved their whole sovereignty, and,

therefore, are subject to no superior; that, because they made

the compact, they can break it when, in their opinion, it has

been departed from, by the other States. Fallacious as this

course of reasoning is, it enlists State pride, and finds

advocates in the honest prejudices of those who have not studied

the nature of our government sufficiently to see the radical

error on which it rests.

"The people of the United States formed the constitution, acting

through the State legislatures in making the compact, to meet

and discuss its provisions, and acting in separate conventions

when they ratified those provisions; but, the terms used in its

construction show it to be a government in which the people of

all the States collectively are represented. We are one people

in the choice of the President and Vice-President. Here the

States have no other agency than to direct the mode in which

the votes shall be given. Candidates having the majority of all

the votes are chosen. The electors of a majority of States may

have given their votes for one candidate, and yet another may be

chosen. The people, then, and not the States, are represented in

the executive branch.

"In the House of Representatives, there is this difference: that

the people of one State do not, as in the case of President

and Vice-President, all vote for the same officers. The people

of all the States do not vote for all the members, each State

electing only its own representatives. But this creates no

material distinction. When chosen, they are all representatives

of the United States, not representatives of the particular

State from which they come. They are paid by the United States,

not by the State, nor are they accountable to it for any act

done in the performance of their legislative functions; and

however they may in practice, as it is their duty to do, consult

and prefer the interests of their particular constituents, when

they come in conflict with any other partial or local interest,

yet it is their first and highest duty, as representatives of

the United States, to promote the general good.

"The constitution of the United States, then, forms a

government, not a league; and whether it be formed by compact

between the States, or in any other manner, its character

is the same. It is a government in which all the people are

represented, which operates directly on the people individually,

not upon the States--they retained all the power they did not

grant. But each State, having expressly parted with so many

powers as to constitute, jointly with the other States, a

single nation, cannot, from that period, possess any right to

secede, because such secession does not break a league, but

destroys the unity of a nation; and any injury to that unity

is not only a breach which would result from the contravention

of a compact, but it is an offence against the whole Union.

To say that any State may at pleasure secede from the Union,

is to say that the United States are not a nation; because it

would be a solecism to contend that any part of a nation might

dissolve its connection with the other parts, to their injury or

ruin, without committing any offence. Secession, like any other

revolutionary act, may be morally justified by the extremity

of oppression; but, to call it a constitutional right, is

confounding the meaning of terms; and can only be done through

gross error, or to deceive those who are willing to assert a

right, but would pause before they made a revolution, or incur

the penalties consequent on a failure.

"Fellow-citizens of my native State, let me not only admonish

you, as the First Magistrate of our common country, not to incur

the penalty of its laws, but use the influence that a father

would over his children whom he saw rushing to certain ruin. In

that paternal language, with that paternal feeling, let me tell

you, my countrymen, that you are deluded by men who are either

deceived themselves, or wish to deceive you. Mark under what

pretences you have been led on to the brink of insurrection and

treason, on which you stand! First, a diminution of the value

of your staple commodity, lowered by over production in other

quarters, and the consequent diminution in the value of your

lands, were the sole effect of the tariff laws.

"The effect of those laws was confessedly injurious, but the

evil was greatly exaggerated by the unfounded theory you were

taught to believe, that its burdens were in proportion to your

exports, not to your consumption of imported articles. Your

pride was roused by the assertion that a submission to those

laws was a state of vassalage, and that resistance to them

was equal, in patriotic merit, to the oppositions our fathers

offered to the oppressive laws of Great Britain. You were told

this opposition might be peaceably, might be constitutionally

made; that you might enjoy all the advantages of the Union, and

bear none of its burdens. Eloquent appeals to your passions,

to your State pride, to your native courage, to your sense

of real injury, were used to prepare you for the period when

the mask, which concealed the hideous features of disunion,

should be taken off. It fell, and you were made to look with

complacency on objects which, not long since, you would have

regarded with horror. Look back to the arts which have brought

you to this state; look forward to the consequences to which

it must inevitably lead! Look back to what was first told you

as an inducement to enter into this dangerous course. The

great political truth was repeated to you, that you had the

revolutionary right of resisting all laws that were palpably

unconstitutional and intolerably oppressive; it was added

that the right to nullify a law rested on the same principle,

but that it was a peaceable remedy! This character which was

given to it, made you receive with too much confidence the

assertions that were made of the unconstitutionality of the

law, and its oppressive effects. Mark, my fellow-citizens,

that, by the admission of your leaders, the unconstitutionality

must be palpable, or it will not justify either resistance or

nullification! What is the meaning of the word palpable, in

the sense in which it is here used? That which is apparent to

every one; that which no man of ordinary intellect will fail

to perceive. Is the unconstitutionality of these laws of that

description? Let those among your leaders who once approved

and advocated the principle of protective duties, answer the

question; and let them choose whether they will be considered

as incapable, then, of perceiving that which must have been

apparent to every man of common understanding, or as imposing

upon your confidence, and endeavoring to mislead you now. In

either case they are unsafe guides in the perilous path they

urge you to tread. Ponder well on this circumstance, and you

will know how to appreciate the exaggerated language they

address to you. They are not champions of liberty emulating the

fame of our revolutionary fathers; nor are you an oppressed

people, contending, as they repeat to you, against worse than

colonial vassalage.

"You are free members of a flourishing and happy Union. There

is no settled design to oppress you. You have indeed felt the

unequal operation of laws which may have been unwisely, not

unconstitutionally passed; but that inequality must necessarily

be removed. At the very moment when you were madly urged on

to the unfortunate course you have begun, a change in public

opinion had commenced. The nearly approaching payment of the

public debt, and the consequent necessity of a diminution of

duties, had already produced a considerable reduction, and that,

too, on some articles of general consumption in your State.

The importance of this change was underrated, and you were

authoritatively told that no further alleviation of your burdens

was to be expected, at the very time when the condition of the

country imperiously demanded such a modification of the duties

as should reduce them to a just and equitable scale. But, as

if apprehensive of the effect of this change in allaying your

discontents, you were precipitated into the fearful state in

which you now find yourselves.

"I adjure you, as you honor their memory; as you love the cause

of freedom, to which they dedicated their lives; as you prize

the peace of your country, the lives of its best citizens,

and your own fair fame, to retrace your steps. Snatch from

the archives of your State the disorganizing edict of its

convention; bid its members to reassemble, and promulgate the

decided expressions of your will to remain in the path which

alone can conduct you to safety, prosperity and honor. Tell

them that, compared to disunion, all other evils are light,

because that brings with it an accumulation of all. Declare

that you will never take the field unless the star-spangled

banner of your country shall float over you; that you will not

be stigmatized when dead, and dishonored and scorned while you

live, as the authors of the first attack on the constitution of

your country. Its destroyers you cannot be. You may disturb its

peace, you may interrupt the course of its prosperity, you may

cloud its reputation for stability, but its tranquillity will

be restored, its prosperity will return, and the stain upon its

national character will be transferred, and remain an eternal

blot on the memory of those who caused the disorder.

"Fellow-citizens of the United States, the threat of unhallowed

disunion, the names of those, once respected, by whom it is

uttered the array of military force to support it, denote the

approach of a crisis in our affairs, on which the continuance of

our unexampled prosperity, our political existence, and perhaps

that of all free governments, may depend. The conjuncture

demanded a free, a full, and explicit enunciation, not only

of my intentions, but of my principles of action; and, as the

claim was asserted of a right by a State to annul the laws of

the Union, and even to secede from it at pleasure, a frank

exposition of my opinions in relation to the origin and form of

our government, and the construction I give to the instrument by

which it was created, seemed to be proper. Having the fullest

confidence in the justness of the legal and constitutional

opinion of my duties, which has been expressed, I rely, with

equal confidence, on your undivided support in my determination

to execute the laws, to preserve the Union by all constitutional

means, to arrest, if possible, by moderate, but firm measures,

the necessity of a recourse to force; and, if it be the will of

Heaven that the recurrence of its primeval curse on man for the

shedding of a brother's blood should fall upon our land, that

it be not called down by any offensive act on the part of the

United States.

"Fellow-citizens: The momentous case is before you. On your

undivided support of your government depends the decision of

the great question it involves, whether your sacred Union will

be preserved, and the blessings it secures to us as one people

shall be perpetuated. No one can doubt that the unanimity with

which that decision will be expressed, will be such as to

inspire new confidence in republican institutions, and that the

prudence, the wisdom, and the courage which it will bring to

their defence, will transmit them unimpaired and invigorated to

our children."

Thirty Years' View (Vol. 1 of 2) or, A History of the Working of the American Government for Thirty Years, from 1820 to 1850 · 第 79 / 166 章