To give you the strongest case against my argument, I will suppose that the Constitution had said—“The State Legislatures may _instruct_ their Senators,” and had said no more; would this have created an imperious obligation on the Senator implicitly to obey the instructions? Would disobedience forfeit his office directly, or virtually by making it his _duty_ to resign it? I think not. It would have been no more than a constitutional, perhaps a superfluous, recognition of the right of the State Legislatures to interfere so far and in this way, with the measures of the federal government, to give their opinions, their recommendation, their counsel, to their Senators; but the Senators would afterwards be at liberty, nay it would be their duty, to act and vote according to their own judgment and consciences, on the responsibility which they _constitutionally_ owe to their constituents, which is found, as Mr. Madison says, _in the periodical change_ of the members of the Senate. The Constitution knows no other check upon the Senators; no other responsibility to the State Legislature, while the Senator acts within and by the admitted powers of his office. But I am wearying you to death. Let me conclude this interminable epistle by referring to an authority which no man living holds in higher reverence than you do. About a week or ten days before the death of that great and pure man, a true and fearless patriot, _Chief Justice Marshall_, I called to see him. This question of instructions was then in high debate in your papers. I said to him that I thought the Virginia doctrine of instructions was inconsistent with all the principles of our government, and subversive of the stability of its foundations. He replied in these words—“It is so; indeed the Virginia doctrines are incompatible not only with the government of the United States, but with _any_ government.” These were the last words I heard from the lips of _John Marshall_. H. PERDICARIS.