to the exercise of the right of resistance to tariff oppressions by an act of nullification. Although these believed in the right of secession, they could not agree that, while remaining a member of the Federal Union, the State could nullify a law of that Union, making it inoperative within its borders.

These discussions before popular audiences have never been equaled as intellectual contests in the history of democracies. It is not surprising, therefore, that during and immediately after this period, we find the best oratorical talent of South Carolina brought into play. We do not believe that any State of the Union has ever had a like array of such splendid orators. They have been equaled in number and ability only by Greece in the era of Pericles. We should recall that the period was adorned by such names as Calhoun, Petigru, McDuffie, Turnbull, Legare, Preston, Hayne, Evans,

Poinsett, Perry, Stephen D. Miller, Daniel E. Huger, William Smith, Harper, and a veritable host of others, almost every county being represented, and many of them, though less distinguished, were of equal ability with those named. Discussions were carried on in every court-house village and at every cross-roads, and around almost every fireside. The State finally took action by a constitutional vote and exercised the right of nullification. General Jackson, then President of the United States, issued a proclamation appealing to the people of his native State not to continue in the course they were pursuing, and thus force him to use the military arm of the government to execute its measures within her borders. What was

known as the "Force Bill" was introduced in Congress, giving the President the use of the military forces for the suppression of disorders in South Carolina. This action on the part of the President and Congress was met by Governor Robert Y. Hayne, with a counter proclamation in the most courageous spirit of resistance against such oppression. The passage of this "Force Bill" was opposed by Mr. Calhoun in the Senate, in an oration of such power and clearness of thought and vigor of utterance as have rarely been exhibited by any orator, ancient or modern.

Henry Clay and Compromise.-South Carolina gained an exalted place in American history by this action. Her people showed that they understood their rights, and the most intricate questions of taxation, and that they had the spirit to stand alone at any peril

for their vindication. Hayne resigned his seat in the Senate and Calhoun resigned the Vice-Presidency, in order that Hayne might become Governor of the State and Calhoun United States Senator, to deal with this tremendous crisis. But when Congress met, Henry Clay, of Kentucky, introduced a compromise measure, which South Carolina accepted, as it granted to her by degrees all she had asked. It was received by the other States in a spirit of conciliation, and peace was assured to the Union.

To appreciate fully the credit due to South Carolina for this action, it is necessary to be more or less familiar with present-day tendencies. That she was far advanced in the best thought in respect to government and its relations to human progress, there remains no longer any doubt. The leading thinkers of Europe and of America are opposed to indirect taxation, as an insult to the intelligence of any people, and a tariff for protection as gross robbery by means of governmental machinery of one class of industries for the benefit of another, and regard this whole system of protection as a misconception of the just functions of government. So, when these great South Carolina statesmen pointed out that this government was founded, not simply for the benefit of those who live under its immediate care, but as a guide, inspiration, and example for all future and larger organizations, under the federal principle, and that it would ultimately insure universal peace and prosperity, they were not "giving up to party what was meant for mankind"; but their great minds penetrated

the questions of their day with unequaled force, and they saw into the future with a distinctness of view that is of the highest credit to their intellectual powers and generous purposes.

It should be remembered, therefore, that "submissionists," like Petigru and Legare, agreed fully with nullifiers, like Calhoun and Hayne, in the general principles involved, but disagreed as to the policy and expediency of exercising the right at that time and also as to the particular scheme of nullification. When the question of secession came up, nearly thirty years later, the convention voted unanimously for that course. Petigru alone, though not a member of the convention, protested against "such folly."

Nullification and Secession.-A recent student of nullification in South Carolina, D. F. Houston, has recorded the conclusion that the nullification movement derives its chief interest from the terrible issues of 1860-65. He says: "The secession movement dates definitely from 1824." To this all South Carolinians are glad to give unqualified assent. It was then that South Carolina began to realize the blunder her statesmen had made, when, in order to pay off the war debt and also to encourage the establishment of manufacturing industries, to promote our industrial and commercial independence of England, her representatives had advocated the system of taxation which afterwards proved the source of her greatest woe. It was chiefly her Calhoun and Lowndes who, actuated by a generous national spirit, favored the adoption of the system as an encour

agement to "infant industries." They must often in after years have been reminded of Byron's lines:

"Keen were his pangs, but keener far to feel,
He nursed the pinion that impelled the steel."

For this conduct they were severely criticised by their able opponents in 1832; but it only remained for them (Lowndes was not then living) to acknowledge their error, to show. that it was a natural one and one that leaned to virtue's side, and in the interest of the cause they then understood to be of greatest benefit to their country.