actions as of the
mode and measure of redress."

Here Mr. JEFFERSON asserts that a State aggrieved shall judge not only
of the mode, but the measure of redress. Is this treason? If the
measure of redress extends to secession, how can the Senator from
Tennessee [Mr. JOHNSON] do less than denounce the great apostle of
liberty--as Mr. JEFFERSON has been called--a traitor?

No less clear and explicit on this point, is the language of Mr.
MADISON. Being chairman of a committee to whom the subject was
referred--the resolutions having been returned by several of the
States--he says in his report:

"It appears to your committee to be a plain principle,
founded in common sense, illustrated by common practice, and
essential to the nature of compacts, that where resort can
be had to no tribunal superior to the authority of the
parties, the parties themselves must be the rightful judges
in the last resort, whether the bargain made has been
pursued or violated. The Constitution of the United States
was formed by the sanction of the States, given by each in
its sovereign capacity. It adds to the stability and
dignity, as well as to the authority of the Constitution,
that it rests on this legitimate and solid foundation. The
States, then, being the parties to the Constitutional
compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of
necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their
authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the
compact made by them be violated, and consequently that, as
the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last
resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to
require their interposition."

In the remarks which I made on the 19th of December last, I referred
to the fact that Virginia, in accepting the Constitution, declared
that the powers granted under that instrument "being derived from the
people of the United States, may be resumed by them whenever the same
shall be perverted to their injury or oppression." I referred, also,
to the fact that New York had adopted the Constitution upon the same
condition and with the same reservation. I may here quote the language
of Mr. WEBSTER, distinctly recognizing the right of the people to
change their Government whenever their interest or safety require it.
He says:

"We see, therefore, from the commencement of the Government