they will pursue. If Congress had merely to deal with South Carolina, it
could easily checkmate that one state; but the difficulty arises from the
_number_ of states, which either side with South Carolina or will not act
against her.

I have the highest respect for Tocqueville's opinion; but I do not happen
to remember what he has written respecting secession. I well understand the
difficulty for a confederation if any one state has a settled permanent
determination to secede from it. But, under the constitution, Congress has
ample powers to levy the federal revenue and maintain the laws of the
Union in South Carolina--and to pass all laws necessary for this purpose.
Moreover, everyone in the Union who levies war against the United States
Government is guilty of treason, and there is no recognition in the
constitution of any right in any state to secede from the Union. Under
these circumstances, everyone in South Carolina caught in arms against the
federal Government is liable to be hanged. With such laws and powers, an
united Congress and a resolute president, like General Jackson, would soon
reduce South Carolina to submission; and my belief is that the same might
be the case if there were a league against the Union of the cotton states
alone. For a time Congress would baffle such a league quite as effectually
as the Swiss Confederation put down the Sonderbund.

Pray give my kind regards to Mrs. Reeve. I expect to be in London at the
end of next week, and I shall be happy to communicate and receive ideas on
American politics. The critical point at present is the course which will
be pursued by Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. Yours very truly,

EDWARD TWISLETON.

The Journal notes:--