Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1860-12-14

Black Republican and Abolition government,
in the hope that Lincoln, the elected Chlel Oh
the party, will change his and their policy TO-
wards US, when the hope is founded on thelm-
~putation that he is a knave, who Tor the Pur-
pose of getting into power, protested principles
which he did not entertain, or, entertaining
them, he will now betray, both his principles
and his party? IF the friends OF a knaVe can
not safely trust him, how shall his enemies 40
it? But in my opinion, there is no ground 1or
the supposition that Mr.. Lincoln intends to
abandon the principles which he and his party
have protested and betray his party; and II
there was, it would only prove the folly oil re-
living Oh the promises aEd professions OF such
a man. believe, therefore, that the Black
Republican and Abolition party, will, as soon
as il is invested with the power OF the Govern
ment, turn it upon us, first, for the purpose oil
carrying out its principles in the form oil law,
and then, Of compelling obedience to them by
force, if they can, with the advantage OF being
able 10 say, that We have submitted to their
government with n knowledge of their prlncl-
pies, and resistance to their law is, therefore,
treason; and, with our people distracted, DIS
hearteucd and torn, by internal factions, when
they find themselves involved in q dilemma,
wheel, makes them traitors 10 the Federal Gov
ernuIcnt, if they obey the State, and traitors
to the Statc, If they obey the Federal Govern.
lncnt. 1t is not difficult to loreteli the late OF
d people thus distracted and divided, in the
face OF u united, powerful and vindictive Toe
In my opinion, therefore, the Southern
| States should, without delay, withdraw from
the present Confedcracy and form a new one,
in which their people will be safe from the az
v~ressions of their enemies, and may ENJOY their
property, in peace, surrounded by plenty.
should content myself on this point, with this
expression Of opinion, in the conviction that,
at this day none could be found to deny the
right Of the people ola State, TO 'alter or abolish
| the form OF their Government whenever tshait
be found to be destructive Of their rights ana
liberty. But, admonishcd, US we are by MI.
Douglas in his Norfolk speech, and by the Ere
sidcnt in his late extraordinary message, that
there arc persons who deny the right oil one, or
all, OF the Southern States to Withdraw from
the present Confederacy Of States, anu that the
great authority of Madison is invoked to suS-
tain it, ! deem it respectful and proper TO sub
nit some OF the reasons, which sustain NY
opinion.
And, first, refer 10 the history Of the Constl-
tuition. In the convention, which framed the
Constitution, Mr.. Patterson, Of New Jersey,
expressed the opinion that q compact formed
by unanimous consent could be dissolved, oniy
b. unanimous consent. Mr.. Madison denied
the notwithstanding that it does not Fesu,'
from the nature Of compact, and that ~ brcach
Of the fundamental principles of the compact,
by q mart Of the society would certainly abSolvc
the other part from their obligations to ii. II
the breach of ana article by any Of the parties
docs not set the others at liberty, it is because
the contrary is implied, in the compact itse'i,
and particularly by that law OF it which gives
an Implied authority to bind the whole IN all
cases. This latter circumstances shows that we
are not to consider the, Federal Union as anal
ocouS to the social couipacts Of individuals; ior
if it were 50, d majority would have a right 10
bind the rest, and even form a new Constitution,
which the gentleman from New Jersey would
be among the last to admit" II we consider
the Federal Union as analogous, not to the soc'a!
compacts among individual men, but to the econ
~vcntions among States, what is the doctrInere.
sulting from the convention? Clearly according
to the exposition Of the law Of nations, that II
breach Of any one article by any party leaves oil
the other parties at liberty 10 consider inc
whole convention as dissolved, unless they
choose rather to compel the delinquent 10 re-
pair the breach. I'm some treaties, indeed. IT Is
expressly stipulated that a violation OF partlcu-
lar articles shall not have this consequence,
and even that particular articles shall remain III
force during war, which is, in general, under
stood to dissolve all subsistins treaties. But,
are there any exceptions Of this sort in the
articles Of confederation So far from IL
there is not even an express stipulation that
force shall he used to compel an offending
member of the Union to discharge its duty.
And in the 2lSt number Ot the tederallSt,
which was an elaborate exposition OF the Con-
s~titution by Alexander Hamilton, John jay
and James Madison, over the signature OF
'Publius," written with the view to III
the Constitution, Mr.. Hamilton says: There
is no express delegation Of authority TO compel
delinquent members; and II such 4 right
should be ascribcd to the Federal head, us re-
sulting from the nature Of the social compact
between the States, it must DC by inference and
construction, in the face Of that part OF the
each State shall retain every power, jurlSdIc.
ton and right not delegated 10 the United
States in Congress assembled" Mr.. HAtnll-
ton then proceeds to argue that the defect m
the articles Of confederation, produced BY this
restricting and reScrying clause, was properly
omitted in the Constitution, and therefore the
power to coercc delinquent members eX-
listed.
But, by the tenth amendment to the Consti.
tuition, this restricting and rcscrrinG clause
was restored, and, therefore, by the admission
: Of both Mr.. Hamilton and Mr.. Madison, the
power to control and cocrcc "dclinqucnt mem
bcrs' does not exist. Is there any one Of the
present day more able than Hamilton and Mad
:. ison, or any Federalist more devoted than
Hamilton Who will be hardy enough to
claim for the Federal Government powers which
Hamilton and Madison denied to it?
Again: In the 3lst number of 1.-THE fede-
ralist," Mr.. Hamilton says: "The State Coy
ernments, by their original constitutions, are
invested with complete sovereignty and III
the 3cd number, he says "that an entire con-
solidation of the States into one complete ma
tional sovereignty would imply m entire sub.
ordination Of the parts. But as the plan OF the
Convention aims only at n partial union or con.
solilation, the State Governments would clear
" retain all the rights Of sovereignty which
they before had, and which were not, by that
act, exclusively delegated to the United States
And Virginia, in her act Of ratification of the
Constitution, declared, "in the name and on
behalf of the people Of Virginia, that the pow
ers granted under the Constitution, being de
rived from the people Of the United States.
NAV be resumed by them whatsoever the same
shall bc perverted to their injury and oppres-
sion, and that all power not granted thereby
remains with them and at their will And the
10th amendment of the Constitution, conform
ing to the ratification by Virginia, express
~ declares, as I have before stated, that
the powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution. nor prohibited by it
to the States, are reserved TO the States, respec'
lively, or TO the people" And the govern.
r ment of the United States has been recognized
hv every department Of it, including the Su-
prclne Court, under the guidance of Marshall
and fancy, and by the people, as 4 govern
ment OF limited power, deriving its whole pow.
or from the grants in the Constitution.
1t may he safely affirmed then