The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-11-13

lest of every true American, the consolidation of
"our Union, in which is involved our prosperity,
"elicty, safety, and, perhaps, our national exist
"ence." 1t is evident, then, that the Constitution
was thought by those who drafted it to provide for
limited but national Government which, when
acting in its legitimate sphere, the States them.
selves were bound to respect and obey. This also
was the view of the public at large; for, in order
10 prevent the ratification of the Constitution, it
was made. the leading objection that tsthe scheme
"of Government was radically wrong because it
Twas not confederation of the States; but Gov
''ernment over individuals" 1t was said ''that
"the Federal form, which regards the Union as
"a confederation Of sovereign States, ought to
"have been preserved instead of which the Con-
'venon had framed national Government
(Which regards the Union as a consolidation of
Estates" But although it was the known pur-
pose and effect of the Constitution to withdraw
from the States a larger portion of power than
they had previously surrendered, and to establish
throughout the land national but limited Gov
eminent over individuals irrespective of State
lines, it was nevertheless approved by the people.
Mr.. PATTERSON and the State-rights' party were
voted down in the Convention and the Constu-
ton constructed on the theory of their opponents.
Congress endorsed it as it was explained by the
letter of the Convention; and it was, in spite of
the objection above mentioned, finally ratified,
and ratified not by the Legislatures of the
States, but by Conventions especially elected to
that end by the people of each State We do not
pretend, in this brief and imperfect sketch,
to demonstrate what we hold, the history Of
the Constitution conclusively proves. We con-
tent ourselves with presenting merely an outline
of the views that we think must naturally sug-
gest and commend themselves to all who study
with any care the history of the period to which
we refer. 1t cannot be then that at the time of
the formation of the Constitution, the right Of
secession or notification was supposed to be re.
tanned by the States, whatever may be the infer
ences which were subsequently drawn from the
phraseology of the Constitution itself. But we are
not left TO conjecture on this point, for Mr.
MADISON distinctly urged the adoption of the
Constitution, on the ground that it would set at
rest that ''enormous doctrine" He even went so
far as 10 deny that any State had right to Sc
cede under the old Confederation. Before the
Constitution was ratified, he wrote as follows -
'resting on no better foundation than the consent
'of the State Legislatures, it (the Confederation
'has been exposed 10 frequent and intricate ques-
"tons concerning the validity of its powers; and
'has in some instances, given birth to the enor-
"mous doctrine of a right of Legislative repeal
fOwing its ratification 10 law of State, it has
'been contended that the same authority might |
"repeal the law, by which it was ratified. How
fever gross heresy it may be to maintain that a
'party 10 a compact has right to revoke that |
Compact, the doctrine itself has had respectable |
advocates. The possibility of question of this |
"nature, proves the necessity of laying the foun-
Citations Of our National Government deeper,
ethan in the mere sanction of delegated authority
''The fabric of American empire ought TO rest on
''the solid basis of the consent of the people, -
And on that basis it was placed by the men who
established it, and the legality of secession was,
in their judgment, thereby decided forever. As
MADISON and HAMILTON thought, so have thought
WEBSTER and STORY, and the great majority of
The illustrious patriots who have lived and died
n the last half century. We cannot to-day, as
We have said, discuss this question as perhaps it
ought to be discussed to carry conviction to mems
minds? But we are satisfied that there is no re-
Ter we'd right of secession which can he exercised
low or hereafter by any of the States which gave
n their adhesion to the Constitution. IF South
Carolina, therefore, goes out of the Union, her
Justification must be that the path of peace and
afety lay only through revolution. Is she pre-
AIRED 10 maintain the validity of that plea to the
of her sister States J?