689 



STATES' RIGHTS. 



the independent right to judge of the infractions and 

 of i In- mode of redress, and propose no second 

 of action to be pursued liy 1 1m' 3 her alone or 



concurrently with any oilier States. They were evi- 

 dently intended as a declaration of principles for the 

 consideration of Congress and of the people ut the 

 approaching geneiul elections, looking to the repeal 

 of the obnoxious laws and the overthrow of the 

 party conducting the government 



The value of these resolutions as a statement of 

 the doctrine of States' rights depends upon certain 

 propositions advanced, and the reasons assigned for 

 their verity. The leading statement is to the effect 

 th.it the general government, " was not made the ex- 

 clusive or final judge of the extent of the powers 

 delegated to itself," and the reason assigned is that 

 that would make its discretion the measure of its 

 powers. Dependent upon this proposition, and ne- 

 cessarily true if the preceding one is established, 

 is the proposition that each State has the right to 

 judge for itself as well of infractions as of the mode 

 and manner of redress. 



The reason assigned for this statement is that it 

 is a consequence common to all other cases of com- 

 pacts among parties having no common judge. This 

 compact is described as one made by the States for 

 certain definite purposes. The denial of the exist- 

 ence of any common judge negatives the attribute 

 of sovereignty in the United States, as all sovereign 

 governments are superior to all tho individuals and 

 communities constituting them, and are judges of 

 the limits of their powers. It is obvious, then, that 

 the Constitution was regarded as a league among 

 sovereign States creating certain governmental agen- 

 cies, but parting with no part of their sovereignty. 

 If such be the case, the principle that each party 

 must judge for himself of the infractions and mode 

 of redress would be applicable, assuming the non- 

 existence of any competent judge among them. 



The resolutions of the Kentucky legislature were 

 sent to the several States then composing the Union, 

 ami replies were returned by several of these States, 

 all of which, except that of Virginia, denied both 

 the principles of construction applied by Kentucky to 

 the Constitution and her deductions from those prin- 

 ciples. Upon the receipt of these replies the legis- 

 lature of Kentucky, in 1799, passed additional reso- 

 lution* reiterating the positions assumed in the 

 resolutions of the preceding year, and declaring 

 " that the several States who formed that instrument, 

 being sovereign and independent, have the unques- 

 tion.ilile right to judge of its infractions ; and that a 

 nullification by those sovereignties of all nnauthor- 

 i/e.l acts done under color of that instrument is the 

 rightful remedy." At the conclusion of tho resolu- 

 tions they decliire their object to be a solemn pro- 

 U,Mt. As in the first series of resolutions, no purpose 

 on tho part of tho State in view of the conditions 

 i is disclosed, and a disinclination to present an 

 ultimatum is evinced by the emphatic statement of 

 tho object of the resolutions as that of a pro' 



In view of the declination of a majority of the 

 States of tho Union toiwnction tho ground assumed 

 bv Kentucky, the only course OJMMI to that State was 

 either to abandon its position or to claim that it was 

 th right of individual N'ates to seek such redress as 

 to them respectively might seem appropriu' 

 this last of tli alternative* was acted upon by the 

 resolutions of 17'.U. 



Following the resolutions of Kentucky, nnd in the, 

 same ye ir, IT'.H, tho legislature of Virginia passed 

 resolutions upon the same subject, that were pro- 

 posed by Mr. Madison. This action is in form 

 nd substance a protest addressed to the several 

 States of the Union against the Alien and Sedition 

 laws enacted by Congress. Adhesion to the Consti- 

 tution and firm attachment to the Union are de- 



clared. It is announced, "That this Assembly doth 

 \piicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the 



I powers of the federal government as resulting from 

 the compact to which the States are parties, as lim- 

 ited by the plain sense and intention of the instru- 

 ment constituting that compact, as no farther valid 

 than they are authorized by the grants enumerated 

 in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, 

 palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, 

 not granted by the said compact, the States, who are 

 parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty 

 bound, to interpose, for arresting the progress of 

 the evil, and for maintaining, wiihiu their respective 

 limits, the authorities, rights, and liberties, apper- 

 taining to tln-m." Kegret is expressed that Congress 

 appears disposed to assume unconstitutional powers 

 tending to a consolidate. 1 government. I'rotcst is 

 made against tho Alien and Sedition laws as the 

 exercise of a power not delegated, that violates fun- 

 damental principles of liberty of conscience and tho 

 press. An appeal is mode to the people of the 

 States to "concur with this commonwealth in de- 

 claring, as it docs hereby declare, that the acts afore- 

 said are unconstitutional ; and that the necessary 

 and proper measures will be taken by each for co- 

 operating with this State, in maintaining unimpaired 



I the authorities, rights, and liberties, reserved to the 



! states respectively or to the people." Direction is 

 given that copies be sent to the legislatures of the 

 several States. 



The Virginia resolutions of 1798 advance no opin- 

 ion as to the existence of a constitutional remedy for 

 t ho grievances complained of, indicate no line of ac- 

 tion that ought to be pursued by the State beyond 

 that of consultation with the sister States, and pro- 

 pose such consultation as the only object beyond 

 that of entering a protest against the action of Con- 

 gress. The case stated as imposing upon the States 

 tho duty of arresting the progress of the evil, and 

 maintaining their liberties, is that of "a deliberate, 

 palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers 

 not granted by the said compact." As a solemn 

 public protest in a great national exigency, its words 

 must be taken with that limitation suggested by the 

 gravity of tho occasion. The powers thus seized 

 upon by Congress must be dangerous in their chor- 

 T, as where they violate fundamental principles 

 of liberty, especially the liberty of conscience and 

 the press, as charged against the action of Congress 

 in another part of tho instrument. Such powers 

 must be obviously nnd unquestionably improper for 

 Congress to assume, in order to satisfy the c 

 sion, "palpable." Finally, they must have been as- 

 sumed for some purpose hostile to the objects of tho 

 t ''institution, as for the purpose of establishing a 

 consolidated government, as elsewhere charged in. 

 the same instrument, in order to satisfy the expres- 

 sion, " deliberate." If the cose as stated had been 

 actual, the right of revolution would have undoubt- 

 edly given tho appropriate remedy, and the mode 

 in which Virginia dealt with the question, if she so 

 believed, must bo regarded as moderate and conser- 

 vative. 



These resolutions were transmitted to the other 

 States and replies wore received from Delaware, 

 Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, Connecti- 

 cut, New Hampshire, and Vermont, all dissenting 

 from the position of Virginia, nnd the majority of 

 them claiming that the questions invoh 

 pini i imlv by the judiciary of 



the United States. 



The character of the replies received and criti- 

 cisms that had been made, unfavorable to the action 

 of Virginia, induced the legislature of that State to 

 reconsider the whole subject, and a report was made 

 to that body by Mr. Madison renewing the entire 



. subject. 



