The Woodville Republican. [volume] (Woodville, Miss.) 1847-1853, 1851-02-25

posed by the articles ot confederation"
? was then moved by Mr. Butler, and Sc
conded by Mr.. Randolph, "that a nation
al government ought TO be established. con.
sisting Of supreme, legislative, judiciary
: and executive" This was met bv a coun
ter resolution excluding the words nationa
and supreme. Here then, the precise ques-
ton which IS now at issue between the
North and the South, was proposed and de.
bated in the Convention. Mr. Randolph
and Mr. Butler gained the victory Massa.
chuse;ts, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia,
North Carolina, and South Carolina, voting
in their favour; Connecticut against them,
and New York was divided. So that six
States out of eight voted for annihIating
the independence of the thirteen States that
then constituted the Union
The contest continued on this question
of national or consolidated government,
until the 25th June, when it was moved to
strike out the word aati0RaL and substitute
United States, that is to substitute a term
OF compact and federation, instead of con.
solidatlon. i he democratic party had now
gained he ascendency and the resolution
was carried as | have already stated A
feeble at empt was made on the oath of
August, TO revive the hopes OF the Consolj-
datlonists, by motion to strike out the
word IegiyLataUe, and substitute the word
people in the LIST section of the 10th article
of the reported Constitution, as TO the cleo
tion OF President, which was negatived nine
States to Two,
Observe W hue the consoiidalonists had
the majority OF State votes, on June 18th,
it was moved by Mr.. Randolph and second
ed BY Mr. Madison, that "the jurisdiction
of the saatjonH ,jWaec1ary, shall extend to
questions otrevenue, impeachment Ofnatlon-
al officers, and questions 1cbtch iav0ke tie
nati0nal peace aad harmony This pass
ed IN The affirmative on that day. 1t Is the
very power now claimed lor the supreme
Court, hy the colisohdatonists and North
ern iurisls. But On the final passage of the
Constitution, if was rejected; the power of
deciding questions of revenue was conceded,
the other two branches OF Mr.. kandolphs
motion were rejected, for the Constitution
as passed, does not contain them.
Let us stop for moment. Is not here,
sufficient and conclusive evidence, that the
Convention did positively reject national
government, with supreme power over the
States and that after frequent debate?
Is not here sufficient and conclusive evil
dence, that the Convention refused to give
to the judiciary, the power of deciding ques-
tions, in which the national peace and har-
mony were involved!
Is not this sufficient and conclusive evil
dence, that the jurisdiction of the Supreme
Court is confined to cases of law and equity
merely, and that all political questions are
excluded? Chief Justice Marshal, as we
all know, has expressed the same opinion,
before he was appointed to the bench, and
before he had any temptation to change it
Let us proceed. If this be Constitution
of the whole people inhabiting the territory
of the United States then the ratification
ought to have been made by majority of
nine thirteenths of the whole people. The
Northern iurists put the question distinctly
upon this ground: by what authority was
the Constitution ratified Here they join is
sue with the South, and they aver that the
Constitution was ratified not by the States,
but by the individual people. Judge Story
also puts it upon this point; the North Amer
lean Review does SO likewise; for they urge
that the Preamble declares
1st "We the people of the United States
do ordain and establish this Constitution.
I'd. The ratification was referred, not the
States, but to the people of the States.
To which reply: the United States is
federal expression; denoting federal com
pact. 1t is the same as the States united.
The term is technical in our constitutional
history, for it was adopted by the old con-
federation in 1777, 1778, and 1871.
Art. |, of that confederation delegates
Legislative power to a Congress Of the UNI
ted States. The people of the United States,
therefore, not the people of one undivided
territory, but of the various States or Ma
tions who agreed to unite together the
United States.
reply secondly, that it is an absurdity
absolutely outrageous, to suppose that
measure so important as remuneration and
annihiIaton of State sovereignty and lnde-
pendenoe, should take place without some
precise indsputabe evidence of it--some
Z clear, dlstllct ctSsIOu, III WOltS dHu pIiioSSo
that admit of no dispute. There Is none
such to be found Up to this lime, we hear
of nothing but States, distinct aud independ-
ent. united by mutual compact, for COM
mon purpose Of delegated agency. There is
no proof of the existence OF such body as the
peopIe, distinct from the people of each sepa-
rate State. Show me if you can, where is
the consent to merge State sovereignty and
independence, to be found in the Constitu-
ton! Nowhere. To assert il, is to con-
vert fiction, intoa fact. The reason OF re-
lerring the. Constitution to Conventions Of
the people was because no Legislature, itseIi
a creature of constitution, could arrogate
the power of deciding on Constitution. A
constitution is an act of sovereignty, to be
exercised by the people in convention, and
by them alone.
The Constitution of the United States