The southern press. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-10-15

s..se.e.e.-.-..sse.-A...- ...----....--..---.--.-
forever the Union II designed to uphold. Mad
Papers, 76l.
But could you rs.unie the confsds.acy by
the sword! What would be the marriage arr
ticle Would you dye the wedding garment
with the blood Of your bride, and lead her to the
sacrifcial altar OF your glorious reunion, the
bleeding, trembling victim Of your brutal viola.
ton.
Never! You may enforce your terms of
peace upon foreign government; you may
wade through seas of blood to the heart of your
alien foe; you may dictate your stern decree in
the capitol Of your enemy, ringing with the
shouts Of your victory (; but you can never
gather around the hearthstone Of common
union, or mingle in the delights Of noble
brotherhood, States, estranged by your wrongs,
crushed by your armies, and to be bound to you
in union, cemented with their blood.
But am not left to maintain this view with
out authority. In the federal convention, pro
position was early introduced to give Congress
the power ito call forth the force Of the Union
against any member Of tho Union failing to full
I'll its duty under the articles thereof. Mad.
Pap, 1872 This was no new proposition, as
we have seen, that it was suggested as early as
1871.
Subsequently, upon the discussion of this
proposition, Mr. Madison moved its postpone
Inent, which. for the reasons alledged by him,
was done mem. con-
These reasons were, that it would be found
impracticable, inetficacious and unjust, to use
force against people collectively; that the
Union based on such principle, Seemed 10 pro
ride for its o,on destruction" He said that sthe
use Of force against State would look more
like declaration of waf," and that it .would
probably be considered by the party attacked as
a ds$olutioa " NIL previous compacis By Whilh
might be 50 framed as To reril.r his proposition
"lanecessary:" Mad Pap, -el,l
1t was postponed, and never suggested after
wards. system was established in which it
was not deemed necessary TO incorporate this
revolving principle; and thus by It's rejection is
the inference made inevitable, that as the Union
can only be formed by the free consent Of the
parties to the compact, II can never be held to.
gethcr against that consent by the force Of arms.
should feel less confidence in these conclu-
sions, were it not for the express reservation of
the right in question made by the State Of Vir-
GINA in her ratification of the federal Constitu-
ton.
In that act she declared "that the powers
granted under thu Constitution being derived
from the people of the United States, may be
resumed by them whensoever the same shall be
perverted to their injury or oppression, and that
every power not granted thereby remains with
them and ut their will" Journal Of Fed. Con-,
4I6.l
Now what did Virginia mean by this Ian.
guage? The reservation of the ri ,l,t to resume,
necessarily involves the idea Of previous dele
ha al huf he
delegatng authority. This is the natural and
inevitable construction from the relation Of these
terms. II, then, the question be asked, to whom
is the right Of resumption under the terms Of
the ratification OF Virginia, the answer will be
found BY asking who delegated the powers to be
resumed!
The answer to this question has been already
given. Each Stale has for itself delegated the
exercise of its powers to the federal govern
ment. II Is proved, as before shown, by incon-
tesbe facts, and is virtually asserted IN the act
Of ratification itself.
IT. then, each State delegated powers, by whom,
but by each, shall or may they be resumed' Can
they be resumed by those who never delegated
themi Clearly not
II it is asked, why was the term, "the people
Of tie United States" See previous comment
on the meaning Of this term, historically con-
sidered, used in this act Of ratification, | an
swer, that il was designed to ASSERT the same
right in the people Of eve:y other State which
Virginia claimed for herself The obvious mean
ing Of the act is this, therefore that the pow
ers granted by the Constitution were derived
from the people Of each Of the United States,
by lis own separate action; that all the powerr
not granted by each State remain with each, and
that such as they have been delegated, when
perverted 10 the injury or oppression Of any
granting State, may be resumed by IT,
This view is distinctly maintained by the re-.
marks Of NJ. Madison respecting the granting
parties 10 the Constitution, and Of Mr.. Nicholas
upon the ratification itself; both delivered In
the Virginia convention 1888. [Elliots Debates
ia, ll6, 564-5.
This right 10 resume the delegated powers, Is
asserted In terms equally emphatic by New York
in her act Of ratification, and as II was subse-
quent 10, and obviously substantially borrowed
from that Of Virginia, from lis direct and reflex
bearing upon the question under discussion, Il Is
important After declaring that its delegates
represented the people Of Nev York, It proceed.
to assert, I" that the powers Of government may
be reossumed by the people, whatsoever Il shall
become necessary 10 their happiness" that al
powers not delegated remain with the people
OF the several States or 10 their respective State
kO'o'u"o"o, 49, lsVui' W Neo. NVn'
26-7.l
Subsequently Rhode Island adopted the Con-
stitntion by form Of ratification, In which the
precise language above cited from that OF New
York Is copied. [lb. 456
II seems, then, beyond doubt, that this hon.
ored commonwealth with two Others, did, at the
moment Of becoming parties 10 the comprot, "a
sert ths right Of re-assuming their delegated
powers under certain circumstances; an asser-
ton which, upor plain principles. IN the language
of Mr. Nicho slready referred 20, became "a
part Of the coaf,acL" . The Constitution" said
he, I" cannot 10 binding on VIZ. ina, bit rih
hess conditions" What coDd;iionsl One ~
them WIS this very right 10 resume, which is the
righ ~ secession. And Il is right BY the
very terms Of reservation, resting for is sx.
ercise only upon the discretion OF The State
itself and not subject 10 DO overrnlcd by The
judgment Of the Others or Of the government
The same views were subsequently main.
tanned 10 the celebrated resolutions and report
Of 1889, from the pen Of Mr.. Madison; and in
the resolutions Of Kentucky, at the same period,
r. A l.. r. n m 80 II