governed." A Government
without such consent they held to be a tyranny.

Now, Mr. President, this brings us to the very point in issue. Who is
to determine whether this consent is given or withheld? Must it be
determined by the ruler? If so, the proposition just stated is an
absurdity. Clearly it was the meaning of those who enunciated this
great truth, that the subjects of a Government have the right to
declare or withhold their consent; otherwise no such right exists.
They, and they only, must judge whether their rights are protected or
violated. If protected, every consideration of interest and safety
impels them to consent to live under a Government which secures the
blessings they desire. If, on the other hand, in their judgment, their
most sacred rights are violated, interest and honor, and the instinct
of self-preservation, all conspire to impel them to withhold their
consent; which being withheld, the Government, as far as they are
concerned, ceases.

Here I would call the attention of the Senate to the first of the
Kentucky resolutions of 1798-'99, written by Mr. JEFFERSON, in which
he says distinctly, that the parties to a political compact must judge
for themselves of the mode and measure of redress, when they consider
the compact violated and their rights invaded:

"_Resolved_, That the several States composing the United
States of America, are not united on the principle of
unlimited submission to their General Government; but that
by compact, under the style and title of a Constitution for
the United States, and of amendments thereto, they
constituted a General Government for special purposes,
delegated to that Government certain definite powers,
reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right
to their own self-government; and that whensoever the
General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are
unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact
each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party;
that this Government, created by this compact, was not made
the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers
delegated to itself, since that would have made its
discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its
power; but that, as in all other cases of compact among
parties having no common judge, each party has an equal
right to judge for itself, as well of infr