the people of the United States." The remarks of but one gentleman in reply to Mr. Murray are reported, and they are those of Mr. John Breckenridge, the mover: he observed, "I consider the co-States to be alone parties to the federal compact, and solely authorized to judge in the last resort of the power exercised under the compact-Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject as to its assumption of power, to the final judgment of those by whom, and for whose use, itself and its powers were all created." In another passage he says, "If upon the representation of the States from whom they derive their powers, they should nevertheless attempt to enforce them, I hesitate not to declare it as my opinion, that it is then the right and duty of the several States, to nullify those acts, and protect their citizens from their operation." On the same day, the resolutions passed both Houses,* the Senate unanimously; and they were approved by the Governor on the 16th of November. Important as these resolutions are, as having proceeded from the author of the Declaration of Independence; influential as they were in contributing to effect a great revolution in the administration of the general government, they, it must likewise be observed, have had a fatal importance in organizing the wretched and delusive misconstruction of the constitution, which has lately infatuated some portions of the United States. With these grave and interesting aspects, they will therefore be traced through their history, to the final disclaimer in our own times, of all such doctrines on the part of Kentucky; when she felt free from the intoxicating delusions of 1798. These expressions of Kentucky sentiments on some of the most prominent measures of the administration of the elder Adams, on being laid before the co-States, agreeably to the direction expressed in the 9th resolution, produced counter resolutions from all the States it is believed, but Virginia. She had echoed the same protest drawn by Mr. Madison, more emphatically than any other

The final votes in the House were as follows:-nays on the 1st resolution, Murray; 2d, Brooke and Murray; 2d, Murray and Poage; 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th, Murray; 9th, Brooke, Murray and Poage.-Palladium, No. 13. 1793,

man, the father of the Federal constitution. Here is the cradle of nullification in the resolutions of Messrs. Jefferson and Madison. That the pernicious doctrine was knowingly rocked to growth and strength, by these sages, the author can not believe, against the solemn assurance of so chaste and virtuous a character as that of President Madison.

*

He declares that "the tenor of the debates, which were ably conducted, and are understood to have been revised for the press by most, if not all, of the speakers, discloses no reference whatever, to a constitutional right in an individual State, to arrest by force, the operation of a law of the United States." "It is worthy of remark," he observes, "and explanatory of the intentions of the legislature, that the words, 'not law, but utterly null and void, and of no force and effect,' which had followed in one of the resolutions, the word unconstitutional, were struck out by common consent." This is unexceptionable testimony for the intentions of Virginia; coming, as it does, from one of the purest political patriarchs, who was intimately conversant with the history of these transactions, now so unexpectedly brought under the public scrutiny. It will, however, be observed, that the language of Mr. Breckenridge in the Kentucky legislature, was unequivocally in favor of passing a law to "nullify the acts of Congress, and protect their citizens from their operation."

On these resolutions' being laid before the legislature of the other States, counter resolutions were adopted, accompanied by counter reports, which it is believed, in the instance of Massachusetts, were expressed with much asperity. These produced the celebrated defence of the resolutions on the part of Virginia, by Mr. Madison. This has hitherto been deemed the very shiboleth and infallible test of immaculate republican faith, on the points involved within their scope; how justly may hereafter appear. In Kentucky, upon the re-assembling of the legislature, on the 14th of November, 1799, the first resolutions expressive of the sense of Kentucky, were passed by the house. In the Senate, Mr. John Pope attempted to amend them in their

Letter to Mr. Everett, Book of the Constitution, p. 87.

most obnoxious passage, by moving to strike out the words, "that a nullification by those sovereignties, (meaning the individual States,) of all unauthorized acts done under color of that instrument, (meaning the constitution of the United States,) is the rightful remedy," and inserting the words, "the right of remonstrating and protesting against such laws belonged to the States." With this amendment, the resolution would have read: "That the several states who formed that instrument, being sovereign and independent, have the unquestionable right to judge of its infraction, and the right of remonstrating and protesting against such law, belonged to the States" The amendment was carried in committee, but it was rejected by a majority one, when the committee returned into the house, and the words moved to be stricken out by Mr. Pope, were retained. The resolutions were approved by Gov. Garrard, and the theory of nullification was fixed on Kentucky. But its practical execution was far from being approved; so much so, that when an attempt was made to convert the fire of the resolutions into an act to protect the citizens of this Commonwealth from the operation of the alien and sedition laws, by attaching penalties for any attempt to enforce them; the Lill received its death blow in Kentucky, never, we trust, to rise from its polluted tomb, until revolution shall again become the only resource, for preserving the liberty and happiness of the Commonwealth.

of

This sketch would be imperfect, if it did not record the death, as it is most devoutly hoped, of this false, dangerous, and unconstitutional doctrine, and its solemn disavowal by the constituted authorities of Kentucky, in their resolutions approved by the Governor,* February 2d, 1833.

The essence of these resolutions is contained in the following extract: "That so long as the present constitution remains unaltered, the legislative enactments of the constituted authorities of the United States can only be repealed by the authorities that made them; and if not repealed, can in no other wise be finally

It is due to the memory of the late amiable and worthy Gov. Breathitt, to mention his particular desire expressed to the author, that he would record the solemn protest of Kentucky, against this doctrine, so fatal in its tendencies to the peace and happiness of this great and glorious republic,

and authoritatively abrogated or annulled, than by the sentence of the Federal Judiciary, declaring their unconstitutionality; that those enactments, subject only to be so repealed or declared null, and treaties made by the United States, are supreme laws of the land; that no State of this Union, has any constitutional right or power to nullify any such enactment or treaty, or to contravene them, or obstruct their execution; that it is the duty of the President of the United States, a bounden, solemn duty to take care that these enactments and treaties be faithfully executed, observed and fulfilled; and we receive with unfeigned and cordial approbation, the pledge which the President has given to the nation in his late proclamation, that he will perform this high and solemn duty."

CHAPTER XVII.

Convention of 1799-Essential alterations of the old Constitution-New ConstitutionSpirit of the Laws from Marshall-State of the Kentucky River-New government of Kentucky-Changes in the state of society--Commercial difficulties-Election of Presi dent Jefferson-Joy of Kentucky-Repeal of the Circuit courts of the United States, and of the internal taxes-Insurance Company--Circuit court system.

No measure of importance suggests itself to the author, at this stage of his history, without digressing beyond any necessity, into the narrative of national affairs, too often forced upon the early story of Kentucky; excepting the convention for framing a new constitution, in the 7th year of the old one.

This body assembled on the 22d of July, 1799; it was organized by the same number of representatives, which the counties were entitled to in the election of the House of Representatives, and elected by the ordinary voters; but the duration of the body was limited to four months. It proceeded to business by choosing Alexander S. Bullitt, a member from the county of Jefferson for its president, and Thomas Todd, the veteran clerk of Kentucky, as its clerk.

No report of the debates of this body, is known to exist, although proposals for taking and publishing them, are con

tained in the newspapers of the day. The various points of division can not therefore be stated; but as a substitute for this narration, a brief analysis of the important alterations in the government by the new constitution, will be offered. The first radical change is, the constitution of the Senate and Executive; the former of which instead of being elected by a college of electors, is distributed among a certain number of senatorial districts, not less than twentyfour, and an additional senator to be chosen for every three representatives, which shall be elected above fifty-eight. One fourth of this body is renewed every year, so that after the first three years, the senators hold their offices for four years.

The Governor instead of being elected by the same college of electors as the Senate, is chosen every four years by the voters directly; but instead of possessing the effectual negative of the old constitution, he is overruled on disapproving a law by a simple majority of all the members elected. Thus is the executive responsibility swallowed up by the legislature, and the representative of the whole commonwealth, is scarcely capable of exercising any effectual check in behalf of the people, over the errors or the mistakes incident to all popular bodies; and which are so usefully subjected to the re-examination of the community, as well as to that of their representatives, by an efficient veto. At present the executive veto is calculated to bring that department of the government into contempt, by its imperfect powers of withstanding the moral force and the esprit du corps, so characteristic of popular bodies. The patronage, which the Governor possesses in so simple and economical a community, furnishes a very confined and indirect influence. Most of the offices within his gift are irremovable at his pleasure. With these two essential alterations, the latter most indubitably for the worse, the new constitution was reported after the labors of twenty-seven days, on the 17th of August. It declared the former frame of government to be in force until the 1st of June, 1800; when the new fundamental law of the State was to go into operation.