Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1855-02-22
THE CONSTITUTIONS AND CONsTITU-
TIONAL PARTIES.


ted to patriotism, we feel that it would be sacri.
ege TO indulge in the acrimonious agitation Of
party politics. But admonished, by one of the
Fathers of the Republic, that it is well some
times to recur to first principles, we propose
offering few remarks on that subject.
II is the Constitution of the United States
that presents and defines those first principles
and it is on that instrument that all respecta.
BILE political parties must poise themselves
1t would be idle to indulge and to express re-
grets that an instrument which seems to us so
plain and clear, should be differently construed
by different men. The word of God itself has
given rise to an infnitude of variant interpre-
tations. While there are numerous religious
sects that draw their creeds from the Bible,
there are two political parties that draw their
creeds from the Constitution. That the mem
bers Of these two different schools Of politics
possess both public and private virtue, none
but bigots will deny.
One of these schools is the Republican
School the other, the Federal School. The
first having regard to the separate conditions
of the colonies anterior to their severance from
the British Crown considering the moving
causes of the Revolution bearing in mind the
different State constitutions and the accompany
ing bills Of rights; looking to the Constitution
of the United States its contemporaneous ex-
position and its real ends and objects, has
made its creed State rights creed. 1t con-
cedes to the General Government all its
granted powers, and claims for the several
States without respect of sections) all their
reserved rights-and all rights not granted to
the General Government are reserved to the
Estates respectively or to the people, of the
States.
The second school--the Federal, interprets
the Constitution quite differently. 1t under
stands it to have built up great oyershadow-
ing central power, which absorbs all the sover-
eighties of the States.
Which school is best calculated to perpetuate
the union of the States, is not difficult cues.
ton to solve. The Republican or Democratic
school, viewing all the States as equal and
sovereign, and yet conceding to the central
government all its proper powers, altogether
discards the idea of sectionalism. The other
school interpreting the Constitution more
loosely, and denying what is technically called
sovereignty to the States, makes the General
Government the great and only Government.
1t teaches that what Congress adopts, the Pre-
sident approves, and the Supreme Court de,
cides, is the supreme law of the land 1t may
Cypress State or injure section it is still
invested with the imposing authority of a su-
preme law. For instance-Congress might
usurp the power to abolish slavery in the Dis.
trict of Columbia, to exclude it from the Ter.
ritores, to arrest the Interstate slave trade. or
even to abolish slavery in the States. If a
President should sign such a law, and a Su
preme Court should pronounce it constitutional,
the Federal or Wing party would say that it
was binding lava supreme law, resistance
to which would be revolution, and that the in.
dividuals engaged in such resistance would be
traitors, whose punishment is death.
Should the north have more States, larger
representation in the two houses of Congress, a
northern President and a majority of Supreme
Court Judges-and should this northern pre-
dominance in all the branches Of the Federal
government be tinctured with Abolitionism,
then there would be war of the North against
the South. This would be sectionalism the
result Of Federalism. The southern section
would be deprived of its property by the usur-
patton of the Federal government and every
southern man who resisted such oppression
would be pronounced traitor and subjected
TO the ignominious process Of hanging. We
infer from all this, and it is legitimate infer
ence, that SECTIoNALISM is the inevitable
result Of Federalism.
But there are other parties in the country
that have built upon other foundations than
the Constitution. They have caught up the
pestilent isms Of the day that spring up with
the prolific rankness of tropical vegetation.
The advocates Of most Of these sms repudiate
both the Bible and the Constitution. One Of
them pretending to recognize each, ambitiously
aspires to absorb both Of the old parties.
For old parties, founded on the Constitution,
honest and time honored, we feel a sincere re.
spect, differ from them as we may, but for new
parties that construct new creeds not known to
the Constitution, and attempt to propagate them
by secret machinery never before introduced
into free country, we can entertain no other
feeling than that Of loathing.
1t is the high duty of the Democratic party
to guard the Constitution and send down to
posterity the blood-bought inheritance derived
from their fathers. Whether in the North or
South, the East or the West, they are impress
ed with but one conviction and moved by but
one impulse. Everywhere, the Democratic
party is the same. 1t has no variant views,
no conflicting creeds. It's members agree
like brothers Ii has but one view and one