The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-10-14

|
has always done by the establishment of central
ism.
Tie who would advise some such scheme, would
really deserve the gratitude Of bis country. 1t
would restore peace TO the Union; it would re-
ylve The affections of the people OF the States
Tor IL +; establish Justice, promote The general
prosperity and welfare, far more than all the
lofty PGans sung, or turgid eulogums pro-
nounced, in behalf OF a Union to be based upon
absolute power and triumphing over the rights
of the States
z. But have suggested another safeguard,
resting upon the sovereignty OF the States: the
existence of the power OF selfproteclon in the
constitution Of our system. Under IL the citi-
zen may rest secure from the ultimate evils Of
consolidation; without it, his destiny would be
tearfuy full of danger
For it is glorious result of the great event
we this day celebrate that when centrasm shall
have triumphed through the forms of law, and
liberty is PROSTATE beneath the heel OF power /;
when the rights, interests, and happines of the
citizens are destroyed or endangered when the
powers she has reserved are usn'ped, or those
she has delegated are abused, Virginia, in the
strength of her ancient dominion and majesty of
her former glory, may and can RESUME The
po'oerS she has granted Hanut The compact Violated
by others and lonhdraU fran Union Inconsistent
,o The rights Of her people and destructive Of her
honor and her Sovereignty
come TO spe TX, then, of the right Of seces-
sion as Inherent in each State, unless sur
rendered; and as one retained and secured to
each in our federal system. 1t is proper to say,
that in maintaining the erislence Of The rigtt, |
do not mean to suggest much less to advocate,
the proprety Of is exercise, either now, or un-
der any future possible contingency.
This all essential right rests upon the sover-
eighty Of the States pre-. existent to, and secured
under the Constitution
mean by the sovereignty of people or a
State, that supreme social power which springs
from the individuals composing it, and dweEs in
it, as one political society. 1t is not that power
which is manifested in government but that alb
solutsm, behind or above it, acting or not act
ing, by itself or through agencies according to
, its own will alone, i is ndvisible and one
though 1t may o crate through many agencies
The division of sovereignty, which is sometimes
} spoken of, is not, therefore, OF this inherent
original right to power, but is division between
various agencies of the pc sers belonging to the
sovereign. The number of its agencies caa in
, no wise impair the oneness of the latter How
: ever multiform the laws OF nature, they are con
fessedly the carnations Of the same omnipotent
and undivided and indivisible unity.
Nov think it susceptible of demonstration
that the only obligation o. the federal Constitu
ton upon a citizen of Virginia, which was
3 originally or now is imposed, results from the
fiat of her sovereignty That obedience TO the
government by her created, is only justiliabe as
r long as suDh government Is In the exercise OF
her authority; and that allie Iiancc to the true
2 sovereign power demands Of her citizen to re.
} gard her action alone as binding upon him, when
7 such authority is revoked and annulled by her.
T have already shown that up to the period OF
5 the present Constitution, and the close Of the
+ old confederation, its sovereignty freedom, and
7 independence" were retained by each of the
States as basis of the latter system. If, then
the States, as individual, political units, have
$ lost their sovereignty, it must be by virtue OF
the present Constitution: which presents the
; enquiry, Hare they so lost Il?
1T is the leading doctrine Of the Massachusetts
; school, that the States, 10 their sovereign ca
r pacity, did not adopt, nor were parties TO the
Constitution; that il was adopted by one people
( the people Of the United States-as IA con.
glomeration existent previous to the revolution
. and during the confederation; and that IL Is the
sovereignty Of our system, and the severa
States merely convenient territorial divisions Of
this one great nation
0 The absurdty of this monstrous doctrine,
t think up to the period of which | am about to
y
fact which assert, 10 opposing this doctrine is
0 that the Constitution was adopted by, and was
and is now binding as a compact, between the
States as sovereign contracting parties. A brie
{ historical summary will place this in clear light
n The sparsely attended convention in An
5 napolis from five States, of which Virginia was
= one, recommended the call OF a convention IL
pursuance of this recommendation, the old Con
b gress, in 1897, passed resolution, declaring
\ that several of the States, by express instruc
o ton to their delegates in Congress, had sug
gested convention for the purposes stated in
e their res olutjon; that in its opinion it is expe
n dent that convention OF deeg ties, who shall
e have been appointed by the several !SfaieS, be
held for the sole and express purpose of re
II viSiag The articles Of confederation, and report
c such alterations and provisions he, Gin, as shall
n when agreed to by Congress and confirmed by
the States, render the federal Constitution ade.
i quate TO the eXigenoies of government and the
/, preservation of the Union" Jour. of Fed
e Con, p. 5, published in 1919, by order of Con
; gress Thus did Congress recognize its own
$ resolution as the suggestion of State instruc.
c ton the convention to be held, as one, not in
tended 10 destroy the Iederatiue character of the
existing system, but merely to reform and amend
: it, and The States the parties r, presented in
the convention, by whom is action was to be
a confirm ed. The States responded in various
forms but in each there is distinct assertion
Of their own character as parties to the Consti.
tuition, and Of the object of the convention, be.
+ ing only TO revise, remedy, and alter the exist
2 ing federal Union so as to make il answer the
purpose for which il was originally designed.
Such was the object for which that celebrated
convention met in Nay 1887. Did it disregard
this object! Did it destroy the federatye char.
} acter of the Union and make il government
T for ppe ps5ple, and that people whose repre-
! sentatives they were not Did its members, the
? delegates from the several States, ever act as
the delegates Of this hypothetical tone people =
Two classes of questions are then suggested
r lst For what general object did they aim
and 10 what attain
! I'd How did they act : and for whom and
by whom was their action 10 be ratified
: do not design in answering the first ques
ton, TO do more than to state one general fact
! in connection with the proceedings of the con
veution.
it was early proposed "to revise and amend
the Articles Of confederation, 80 as to render the
| IL. h. 81 h.