But let me ask, Sir, what evidence there is, that the President is himself opposed to the doctrines of nullification:  I do not say to the political party which now pushes these doctrines, but to the doctrines themselves.  Has he anywhere rebuked them?  Has he anywhere discouraged them?  Has his influence been exerted to inspire respect for the Constitution, and to produce obedience to the laws?  Has he followed the bright example of his predecessors?  Has he held fast by the institutions of the country?  Has he summoned the good and the wise around him?  Has he admonished the country that the Union is in danger, and called on all the patriotic to come out in its support?  Alas!  Sir, we have seen nothing, nothing, of all this.

Mr. President, I shall not discuss the doctrine of nullification.  I am sure it can have no friends here.  Gloss it and disguise it as we may, it is a pretence incompatible with the authority of the Constitution.  If direct separation be not its only mode of operation, separation is, nevertheless, its direct consequence.  That a State may nullify a law of the Union, and still remain in the Union; that she may have Senators and Representatives in the government, and yet be at liberty to disobey and resist that government; that she may partake in the common councils, and yet not be bound by their results; that she may control a law of Congress, so that it shall be one thing with her, while it is another thing with the rest of the States;—­all these propositions seem to me so absolutely at war with common sense and reason, that I do not understand how any intelligent person can yield the slightest assent to them.  Nullification, it is in vain to attempt to conceal it, is dissolution; it is dismemberment; it is the breaking up of the Union.  If it shall practically succeed in any one State, from that moment there are twenty-four States in the Union no longer.  Now, Sir, I think it exceedingly probable that the President may come to an open rupture with that portion of his original party which now constitutes what is called the Nullification party.  I think it likely he will oppose the proceedings of that party, if they shall adopt measures coming directly in conflict with the laws of the United States.  But how will he oppose?  What will be his course of remedy?  Sir, I wish to call the attention of the Convention, and of the people, earnestly to this question,—­How will the President attempt to put down nullification, if he shall attempt it at all?

Sir, for one, I protest in advance against such remedies as I have heard hinted.  The administration itself keeps a profound silence, but its friends have spoken for it.  We are told, Sir, that the President will immediately employ the military force, and at once blockade Charleston!  A military remedy, a remedy by direct belligerent operation, has been thus suggested, and nothing else has been suggested, as the intended means of preserving the Union.  Sir, there is no