Holladay, Hubbard, Hughes, Huil, Jackson, Marmaduke Johnson, Peter C. Johnston, Kilby, Lewis, McComas, McGrew, McNeil, Macfarland, Marshall, Marye, Maslin, Masters, Miller, Moffet, Nelson, Osburn, Parks, Petrick, Pendleton, Porter, Preston, Price, P Mr. Holladay, of Portsmouth, briefly opposed the amendment, and gave reasons why he should vote for the report.
Mr. Macfarland, of Richmond city, made an argument upon the question whether a State that was in a condition of subordination in esse, as it stood, asserted no dangerous doctrine, and was acceptable to him without amendment.
Mr. Wise replied to Mr. Macfarland.
He did not know that any one claimed absolute sovereignty for a State, but contended that a State, like Texas for iay imposts and to declare war. A State did not part with its sovereignty by merging it with other sovereignties.
Mr. Macfarland asked whether, when, by by the position of Virginia, she might be dragged into a foreign war, against her will, she s
en all was done, consistent with the law, State and Federal, if no one else would raise that flag, he would; and if that be treason, make the most of it.
Mr. Macfarland said that he had no reference to ulterior objects, but elementary and primary objects.
He asked whether an intelligent people could be justified in violatingone say that while Va. acknowledges the jurisdiction of the Federal Government, he would muster a force to resist the execution of its laws?
The direction of Mr. Macfarland's argument was, that while Virginia remained in and claimed the benefits of the Union, she must acknowledge its supremacy.
No power on earth was "sovereign,"h, Fugate, Gillespie, Gray, A. Hall, E. B. Hall, Haymond, Hoge, Holiday, Hubbard, Hughes, Hall, Jackson, P. C. Johnstone, Kilby, Lewis, McComas, McGrew, McNeil, Macfarland, Marshall, Marr, Maslin, Masters, Moffett, Moore, Orrick, Osburn, Parks, Pendleton, Porter, Price, Pugh.
Wm. C. Scott, Sharp, Sitlington, Spurlock, A. H. H. St