REVENUE COLLECTION, OR FORCE BILL.
The President in his message on the South Carolina proceedings had
recommended to Congress the revival of some acts, heretofore in
force, to enable him to execute the laws in that State; and the
Senate's committee on the Judiciary had reported a bill accordingly
early in the session. It was immediately assailed by several
members as violent and unconstitutional, tending to civil war, and
denounced as "the bloody bill"--"the force bill," &c. Mr. Wilkins
of Pennsylvania, the reporter of the bill, vindicated it from this
injurious character, showed that it was made out of previous laws,
and contained nothing novel but the harmless contingent authority to
remove the office of the customs from one building to another in the
case of need. He said:
"The Judiciary Committee, in framing it, had been particularly
anxious not to introduce any novel principle--any which could
not be found on the statute book. The only novel one which
the bill presented was one of a very simple nature. It was
that which authorized the President, under the particular
circumstances which were specified in the bill, to remove the
custom-house. This was the only novel principle, and care was
taken that in providing for such removal no authority was given
to use force.
"The committee were apprehensive that some collision might take
place after the 1st of February, either between the conflicting
parties of the citizens of South Carolina, or between the
officers of the federal government and the citizens. And to
remove, as far as possible, all chance of such collision,
provision was made that the collector might, at the moment of
imminent danger, remove the custom-house to a place of security;
or, to use a plain phrase, put it out of harm's way. He admitted
the importance of this bill; but he viewed its importance as
arising not out of the provisions of the bill itself, but out of
the state of affairs in South Carolina, to which the bill had
reference. In this view, it was of paramount importance.
"It had become necessary to legislate on this subject; whether
it was necessary to pass the bill or not, he would not say;
but legislation, in reference to South Carolina, previous to
the 1st of February, had become necessary. Something must be
done; and it behooves the government to adopt every measure of
precaution, to prevent those awful consequences which all must
foresee as necessarily resulting from the position which South
Carolina has thought proper to assume.
"Here nullification is declaimed, on one hand, unless we abolish
our revenue system. We consenting to do this, they remain quiet.
But if we go a hair's breadth towards enforcing that system,
they present secession. We have secession on one hand, and
nullification on the other. The senator from South Carolina
admitted the other day that no such thing as constitutional
secession could exist. Then civil war, disunion, and anarchy
must accompany secession. No one denies the right of revolution.
That is a natural, indefeasible, inherent right--a right which
we have exercised and held out, by our example, to the civilized
world. Who denies it? Then we have revolution by force, not
constitutional secession. That violence must come by secession
is certain. Another law passed by the legislature of South
Carolina, is entitled a bill to provide for the safety of the
people of South Carolina. It advises them to put on their armor.
It puts them in military array; and for what purpose but for
the use of force? The provisions of these laws are infinitely
worse than those of the feudal system, so far as they apply to
the citizens of Carolina. But with its operations on their own
citizens he had nothing to do. Resistance was just as inevitable
as the arrival of the day on the calendar. In addition to these
documents, what did rumor say--rumor, which often falsifies,
but sometimes utters truth. If we judge by newspaper and other
reports, more men were now ready to take up arms in Carolina,
than there were during the revolutionary struggle. The whole
State was at this moment in arms, and its citizens are ready
to be embattled the moment any attempt was made to enforce the
revenue laws. The city of Charleston wore the appearance of a
military depot."
The Bill was opposed with a vehemence rarely witnessed, and every
effort made to render it odious to the people, and even to extend
the odium to the President, and to all persons instrumental in
bringing it forward, or urging it through. Mr. Tyler of Virginia,
was one of its warmest opposers, and in the course of an elaborate
speech, said:
"In the course of the examination I have made into this subject,
I have been led to analyze certain doctrines which have gone out
to the world over the signature of the President. I know that my
language may be seized on by those who are disposed to carp at
my course and to misrepresent me. Since I have held a place on
this floor, I have not courted the smiles of the Executive; but
whenever he had done any act in violation of the constitutional
rights of the citizen, or trenching on the rights of the Senate,
I have been found in opposition to him. When he appointed corps
of editors to office, I thought it was my duty to oppose his
course. When he appointed a minister to a foreign court without
the sanction of the law, I also went against him, because, on
my conscience, I believed that the act was wrong. Such was my
course, acting, as I did, under a sense of the duty I owed to
my constituents; and I will now say, I care not how loudly the
trumpet may be sounded, nor how low the priests may bend their
knees before the object of their idolatry, I will be at the side
of the President, crying in his ear, 'Remember, Philip, thou art
mortal!'
"I object to the first section, because it confers on the
President the power of closing old ports of entry and
establishing new ones. It has been rightly said by the gentleman
from Kentucky [Mr. Bibb] that this was a prominent cause which
led to the Revolution. The Boston port bill, which removed the
custom-house from Boston to Salem, first roused the people to
resistance. To guard against this very abuse, the constitution
had confided to Congress the power to regulate commerce; the
establishment of ports of entry formed a material part of this
power, and one which required legislative enactment. Now I
deny that Congress can deputize its legislative powers. If it
may one, it may all; and thus, a majority here can, at their
pleasure, change the very character of the government. The
President might come to be invested with authority to make all
laws which his discretion might dictate. It is vain to tell me
(said Mr. T.) that I imagine a case which will never exist. I
tell you, sir, that power is cumulative, and that patronage
begets power. The reasoning is unanswerable. If you can part
with your power in one instance, you may in another and another.
You may confer upon the President the right to declare war; and
this very provision may fairly be considered as investing him
with authority to make war at his mere will and pleasure on
cities, towns, and villages. The prosperity of a city depends
on the position of its custom-house and port of entry. Take the
case of Norfolk, Richmond, and Fredericksburg, in my own State;
who doubts but that to remove the custom-house from Norfolk to
Old Point Comfort, of Richmond to the mouth of Chickahominy,
or of Fredericksburg to Tappahannock or Urbanna, would utterly
annihilate those towns? I have no tongue to express my sense
of the probable injustice of the measure. Sir, it involves the
innocent with the guilty. Take the case of Charleston; what if
ninety-nine merchants were ready and willing to comply with your
revenue laws, and that but one man could be found to resist
them; would you run the hazard of destroying the ninety-nine
in order to punish one? Trade is a delicate subject to touch;
once divert it out of its regular channels, and nothing is
more difficult than to restore it. This measure may involve the
actual property of every man, woman, and child in that city;
and this, too, when you have a redundancy of millions in your
treasury, and when no interest can sustain injury by awaiting
the actual occurrence of a case of resistance to your laws,
before you would have an opportunity to legislate.
"He is further empowered to employ the land and naval forces,
to put down all 'aiders and abettors.' How far will this
authority extend? Suppose the legislature of South Carolina
should happen to be in session: I will not blink the question,
suppose the legislature to be in session at the time of any
disturbance, passing laws in furtherance of the ordinance which
has been adopted by the convention of that State; might they
not be considered by the President as aiders and abettors? The
President might not, perhaps, march at the head of his troops,
with a flourish of drums and trumpets, and with bayonets fixed,
into the state-house yard, at Columbia; but, if he did so, he
would find a precedent for it in English history.
"There was no ambiguity about this measure. The prophecy had
already gone forth; the President has said that the laws will
be obstructed. The President had not only foretold the coming
difficulties, but he has also assembled an army. The city of
Charleston, if report spoke true, was now a beleagured city; the
cannon of Fort Pinckney are pointing at it; and although they
are now quietly sleeping, they are ready to open their thunders
whenever the voice of authority shall give the command. And
shall these terrors be let loose because some one man may refuse
to pay some small modicum of revenue, which Congress, the day
after it came into the treasury, might vote in satisfaction of
some unfounded claim? Shall we set so small a value upon the
lives of the people? Let us at least wait to see the course of
measures. We can never be too tardy in commencing the work of
blood.
"If the majority shall pass this bill, they must do it on their
own responsibility; I will have no part in it. When gentlemen
recount the blessings of union; when they dwell upon the past,
and sketch out, in bright perspective, the future, they awaken
in my breast all the pride of an American; my pulse beats
responsive to theirs, and I regard union, next to freedom, as
the greatest of blessings. Yes, sir, 'the federal Union must
be preserved.' But how? Will you seek to preserve it by force?
Will you appease the angry spirit of discord by an oblation
of blood? Suppose that the proud and haughty spirit of South
Carolina shall not bend to your high edicts in token of fealty;
that you make war upon her, hang her Governor, her legislators,
and judges, as traitors, and reduce her to the condition of a
conquered province--have you preserved the Union? This Union
consists of twenty-four States; would you have preserved
the Union by striking out one of the States--one of the old
thirteen? Gentlemen had boasted of the flag of our country,
with its thirteen stars. When the light of one of these stars
shall have been extinguished, will the flag wave over us, under
which our fathers fought? If we are to go on striking out star
after star, what will finally remain but a central and a burning
sun, blighting and destroying every germ of liberty? The flag
which I wish to wave over me, is that which floated in triumph
at Saratoga and Yorktown. It bore upon it thirteen States, of
which South Carolina was one. Sir, there is a great difference
between preserving Union and preserving government; the Union
may be annihilated, yet government preserved; but, under such a
government, no man ought to desire to live."
Mr. Webster, one of the committee which reported the bill, justly
rebuked all this vituperation, and justified the bill, both for the
equity of its provisions, and the necessity for enacting them. He
said:
"The President, charged by the constitution with the duty
of executing the laws, has sent us a message, alleging that
powerful combinations are forming to resist their execution;
that the existing laws are not sufficient to meet the crisis;
and recommending sundry enactments as necessary for the
occasion. The message being referred to the Judiciary Committee,
that committee has reported a bill in compliance with the
President's recommendation. It has not gone beyond the message.
Every thing in the bill, every single provision, which is now
complained of, is in the message. Yet the whole war is raised
against the bill, and against the committee, as if the committee
had originated the whole matter. Gentlemen get up and address
us, as if they were arguing against some measure of a factious
opposition. They look the same way, sir, and speak with the same
vehemence, as they used to do when they raised their patriotic
voices against what they called a 'coalition.'
"Now, sir, let it be known, once for all, that this is an
administration measure; that it is the President's own measure;
and I pray gentlemen to have the goodness, if they call it hard
names, and talk loudly against its friends, not to overlook its
source. Let them attack it, if they choose to attack it, in its
origin.
"Let it be known, also, that a majority of the committee
reporting the bill are friends and supporters of the
administration; and that it is maintained in this house by those
who are among his steadfast friends, of long standing.
"It is, sir, as I have already said, the President's own
measure. Let those who oppose it, oppose it as such. Let them
fairly acknowledge its origin, and meet it accordingly.
"The honorable member from Kentucky, who spoke first against the
bill, said he found in it another Jersey prison-ship; let him
state, then, that the President has sent a message to Congress,
recommending a renewal of the sufferings and horrors of the
Jersey prison-ship. He says, too, that the bill snuffs of the
alien and sedition law. But the bill is fragrant of no flower
except the same which perfumes the message. Let him, then, say,
if he thinks so, that General Jackson advises a revival of the
principles of the alien and sedition laws.
"The honorable member from Virginia [Mr. Tyler], finds out a
resemblance between this bill and the Boston port bill. Sir, if
one of these be imitated from the other, the imitation is the
President's. The bill makes the President, he says, sole judge
of the constitution. Does he mean to say that the President has
recommended a measure which is to make him sole judge of the
constitution? The bill, he declares, sacrifices every thing to
arbitrary power--he will lend no aid to its passage--he would
rather 'be a dog, and bay the moon, than such a Roman.' He did
not say 'the old Roman.' Yet the gentleman well knows, that
if any thing is sacrificed to arbitrary power, the sacrifice
has been demanded by the 'old Roman,' as he and others have
called him; by the President whom he has supported, so often
and so ably, for the chief magistracy of the country. He says,
too, that one of the sections is an English Botany Bay law,
except that it is much worse. This section, sir, whatever it
may be, is just what the President's message recommended.
Similar observations are applicable to the remarks of both the
honorable gentlemen from North Carolina. It is not necessary to
particularize those remarks. They were in the same strain.
"Therefore, sir, let it be understood, let it be known, that the
war which these gentlemen choose to wage, is waged against the
measures of the administration, against the President of their
own choice. The controversy has arisen between him and them,
and, in its progress, they will probably come to a distinct
understanding.
"Mr. President, I am not to be understood as admitting that
these charges against the bill are just, or that they would
be just if made against the message. On the contrary, I think
them wholly unjust. No one of them, in my opinion, can be made
good. I think the bill, or some similar measure, had become
indispensable, and that the President could not do otherwise
than to recommend it to the consideration of Congress. He
was not at liberty to look on and be silent, while dangers
threatened the Union, which existing laws were not competent, in
his judgment, to avert.
"Mr. President, I take this occasion to say, that I support
this measure, as an independent member of the Senate, in the
discharge of the dictates of my own conscience. I am no man's
leader; and, on the other hand, I follow no lead, but that
of public duty, and the star of the constitution. I believe
the country is in considerable danger; I believe an unlawful
combination threatens the integrity of the Union. I believe the
crisis calls for a mild, temperate, forbearing, but inflexibly
firm execution of the laws. And, under this conviction, I give
a hearty support to the administration, in all measures which I
deem to be fair, just, and necessary. And in supporting these
measures, I mean to take my fair share of responsibility, to
support them frankly and fairly, without reflections on the
past, and without mixing other topics in their discussion.
"Mr. President, I think I understand the sentiment of the
country on this subject. I think public opinion sets with an
irresistible force in favor of the Union, in favor of the
measures recommended by the President, and against the new
doctrines which threaten the dissolution of the Union. I
think the people of the United States demand of us, who are
intrusted with the government, to maintain that government;
to be just, and fear not; to make all and suitable provisions
for the execution of the laws, and to sustain the Union and
the constitution against whatsoever may endanger them. For
one, I obey this public voice; I comply with this demand of
the people. I support the administration in measures which I
believe to be necessary; and, while pursuing this course, I
look unhesitatingly, and with the utmost confidence, for the
approbation of the country."
The support which Mr. Webster gave to all the President's measures
in relation to South Carolina, and his exposure of the doctrine of
nullification, being the first to detect and denounce that heresy,
made him extremely obnoxious to Mr. Calhoun, and his friends; and
must have been the main cause of his exclusion from the confidence
of Mr. Clay and Mr. Calhoun in the concoction of their bill, called
a compromise. His motives as well as his actions were attacked,
and he was accused of subserviency to the President for the sake
of future favor. At the same time all the support which he gave
to these measures was the regular result of the principles which
he laid down in his first speeches against nullification in the
debate with Mr. Hayne, and he could not have done less without being
derelict to his own principles then avowed. It was a proud era in
his life, supporting with transcendent ability the cause of the
constitution and of the country, in the person of a chief magistrate
to whom he was politically opposed bursting the bonds of party at
the call of duty, and displaying a patriotism worthy of admiration
and imitation. General Jackson felt the debt of gratitude and
admiration which he owed him; the country, without distinction of
party, felt the same; and the universality of the feeling was one of
the grateful instances of popular applause and justice when great
talents are seen exerting themselves for the good of the country. He
was the colossal figure on the political stage during that eventful
time; and his labors, splendid in their day, survive for the benefit
of distant posterity.