The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1857-12-24


toned the Declaration of Independence"
Each colony having thus become State, and
each adopting for itself its separate State Gov.
eminent. acted for itself alone under the old
Continental Congress. Each State acted for
itself alone in accedipg to the articles of Con-
federation in ITS, and each State acted for it
self alone in framing and ratifying, each for
itself, the Constitution OF the United States.
Sovereignty, then, with US, rests exclusively
with the people of each State. The Constitu-
ton of the United States is not sovereign, for
it was created by States, each exercising for
itself that highest political power called sover-
eighty. For the same reason, the Government
of the United States is not sovereign, nor does
it exercise any sovereign powers. 1t exercises
ouly delegated powers as declared by the
Constitution, and those powers only which are
granted by that instrument. Delegated powers
are not sovereign powers, but are powers
granted by sovereignty. Sovereignty, being
this highest political power, cannot be delega-
ted-it is indivisible-it is q unit, incapable OF
partition. Hence the great error of supposing
that sovereignty is divided between the States
and the United States.
"The Constitution of the United States is
the supreme law and not obligatory as such;
but a law is not sovereignty, but an act of SOW
.reignty. All laws imply lawmakers; and
in this case, thase who framed and ratified
this supreme law were those sovereignties
called the States, each acting exclusively for
itself, uncontrolled by any sister State, except
by the moral force of its influence and example.
The Government of the United States possess
ing, as we have shown, no sovereignty, but
only delegated powers, to them alone it must
look for the exercise of all constitutional au-
thority, in Territories as well as States, for
there is not single power granted by the Con-
stitution to this Government in q Territory
which is not granted in a State, except the
power to admit new States into the Union,
which, as shown by the Madison Papers, the
trainers of the Constitution (as first demonstra-
ted in my Texas letter. refused to limit to our
then existing Territories. In the Territories,
then, well as the States, Congress possesses
no sovereignty, and can exercise only the pow
ers delegated by the Constitution and all the
powers not thus granted are dormant or re-
served powers, belonging, in common terrific
~, to all the States, as coequal, joint tenants
there of that highest political power called SOW
ereignty."
1t will be perceived that this doctrine, that
sovereignty makes Constitutions" that "sover
eighty rests exclusively with the people of each
State" that Sovereignty cannot be delegated"
that sit is inalienable, indivisble," a unit,
incapable of partition" are doctrines ever re.
garded by me as fundamental principles of
public liberty and of the Federal Constitution.
1t will be seen that these views, which have
ever entertained, were not framed to suit any
emergency in Kansas, but were my lifelong
principles, and were published and promulgated
by me, in an elaborate argument over my own
signature, twelve months before my departure
TO that Territory, and whenI never thought of
going to Kansas. These rights have ever
regarded as fully secured to the people "of ell
the Territories" in adopting their State Con.
stitutions, by the Kansas and Nebraska BILL
Such is the construction given to that act by
Congress in passing the Minnesota bill, so
justly applauded by the President. Such is the
construction of this Kansas act by its distin-
guished author, not only in his late most
able argument, but in addresses made and
published by him long antecedent to that date,
showing that this sovereign power of the peo-
pie, in acting upon a State Constitution, is not
confined to the question of Slavery, but in
cludes all other subject embraced in such an
instrument.
Indeed, believe the Kansas and Nebraska
bill would have violated the rights of sovereign
ty reserved to the people of each State by the
Federal Constitution, if it had deprived them,
or Congress should now deprive them, of the
right OF voting for or against their State Con
stitution. The President, in his message,
thinks that the rights secured by this bill to the
people, in acting upon their State Constitution,
are confined to the Slavery question; but /
think, as shown in my address before quoted,
that sovereignty is the power that makes Con.
stitutioDs and Governments" and that not only
the Slavery clause in State Constitution, but
all others, must be submitted. The President
thinks that sovereignty can be delegated at
least IN part. / think that sovereignty cannot
be delegated at all. The President believes
that sovereignty is divisible between conven.
tons and the people, to be exercised by the
former on all subjects but Slavery, and by the
latter, only on that question. Whereas, l
think that sovereignty is inalienable," 4" indi-
visible, "a unit, incapable of partition" and
THAT it cannot be delegated" in whole or in
part.
1t will not be denied that sovereignty is the
only power that can make State Constitution,
and that it rests exclusively with the people ;
and if it is iralienable, and cannot be delega-
ted, as have shown, then It can only be exer-
cised by the people themselves. Under our
Government, we know no sovereigns but the
people Conventions are composed of "deIe-
| gates" They are mere agents or trustees, ex-
erclsing not sovereign but delegated power,
and the people are the principals. The power
| delegated to such conventions can properly
only extend to the framing of the Constitution,
but its ratification or rejection can only be per
| formed by the power where sovereignty alone
rests, namely, the people themselves. We must
not confound sovereign with delegated powers.
| The provisional authority of convention to
frame Cons tuition, and submit it to the people
Is delegated power; but sovereignty alone
which rests exclusively with the people, can
ratiy and put in force that Constitution.
Ind = L n
sovereignty, and ] know of no such thing
nor does the Federal Constitution recognise
it, as delegated or conventional sovereignty
The President, in a very lucid passage of his
able message, gives unanswerable reasons why
the people, and not conventions, should decide
the question OF Slavery in framing State Con
shtuuon. de says, very truly, that from the
necessary division of the inchoate State into dis
tricts, a majority of the delegates may think one
way, aud the people another and that the dele
gates las was the case in Kansas) may violate
their pledges, or fail to execute the will of the
people.
And why does not this reasoning apply with
equal force to all other great questions embed
led in State Constitution And Why should
the question of Slavery alone override and ex
tinguish the doctrine of popular soyere;pnt,
and the right of selfgovernment? Most fortu
naey, this is no sectional question, for it belongs
alike to the States admitted or inchoate, of III,
South as of the North. 1t is not question O
Slavery, but of State rights and of State anc
popular sovereignty, and my objections to tn,
Lecompton Constitution are equally strong
whether Kansas under its provisions should b,
made a free or slave State. My objections
are based upon violation of the right of self
government and of State and popular sovereign
ty, and of forcing any Constitution upon tn,
people against their will, whether it recognised
Freedom or Slavery. Indeed, the first question
| which tho neonla ouoht to dooido IN fo-n,;no