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

ces would have been lorelgn from the range OF
subjects proper for consideration at such time,
but which the madness, that, in certain quarters,
seems to rule the hour renders not only appropriate
but almost necessary the sentiments expressed by
Mr. Brown, will find hearty response, not in this
city alone, but throughout the entire State. We
have, heretofore signally faledn making ourselves
understood, lift necessary for US now, to say
that the address, in ITSELF not only meets our entire
and cordial appreciation, but that it is precisely
what we expected and had a right to expect from
its author. We will only add now, our perfect con-
vction that the ideas therein expressed notex
posed for show, but constitute the principles which
will govern Mr.. BRowN's administration.
@@@<z.~=z.sa.z--7-
Among the many serious questions which the
present crisis forces upon our consideration, that
touching the right of secession, is the first which
challenges our attention. If any State has deter
mined to cast off its allegiance to the Federal
Government, it is important for us to decide
whether such action is legal or revolutionary If
the connection between the States is simply ALI
ance or league, which theyhave the right, upou Civ
ing proper notice, to dissolve then they may lawful
ly withdraw from the Union, even though they have
the very slightest cause for taking such step
But if on the other hand, no legitimate deduction
can be drawn fIam the Constitution i'll favor of
such right as that CT secession, then such move
Inent is revolution, of which the States who par
ticipate in it must assume the solemn responsible
ity. In the one case, those who advocate the dis
union policy may commit mistake, but they are
not guilty of crme-n the other they will in
cur eternal nfamy if they fail to satisfy the world
that the exigency of the occasion was such as TO
compel them to raise the banner of revolt in order
to secure their own safety, freedom and honor
How, then, is the course which South Carolina
contempates, to be regarded by her sister States?
In our Judgment, she must justify her conduct
upon the same grounds that suffice to excuse a re-
volution. We cannot believe the right of seces-
sion to be one of the reserved, as it certainly is
not Of the expressed, rights of the States. 1t
would be impossible TO compress within the COM
pass of volume the able and exhaustive argu-
ments of the great writers by whom this view has
been sustained, and we cannot therefore pretend
to reproduce them. But without undertaking to
discuss the meaning of the Constitution as it is to
be gathered from the language of that document
circumstances under which it was formed, because
these can be briefly stated, and the differences to be
fairly drawn from them strongly support the doc
trine we uphold.
The Articles of Confederation, which were rati-
fed in March, 1871, certainly contemplated an al
lance merely, between sovereign States. That in
strument was framed by the Continental Congress,
whose members were in most instances the mere
delegates of Colonial Legislatures and not direct
ly the representatives Of the people; and it was af-
forwards ratified, not by the people, but by the
existing State Governments. The style of the
Confederacy was, "The United States Of Ameri-
"ca,' and it was explicitly declared that each
State retained its sovereignty, freedom and
independence, and every power, jurisdiction and
right which was not expressly delegated to the
Congress of the United States. How limited the
powers so granted really were, and how far their
exercise was restricted, any legal textbook
or history will show The Federal author
ity was vested in a Congress in which each
State had one vote, and the power was reserved
to each State to recall any or all of its dele
gates and to send others in their stead. Nor could
the Congress engage in war, nor grant letters of
maroue, nor enter into treaties, nor coin money
nor ascertain the necessary for the defence of
the country, nor emit bills, nor borrow money,
nor appropriate money, nor agree upon the num-
Der of vessels to be built, or the number of land
and sea forces to be raised, nor appoint COM
mander-in-chief of the army or navy, unless nine
States should assent to the same. And no cues
ton, except on an adjournment from day to day.
could be determined except by vote of a majority
of the States
Such was the Confederation under which, it was
hoped, the Union of the States would be perpetual.
That it was mere league between sovereign and
independent States is evident. The Federal Con-
gress could scarcely be dignifed with the name of
a. government. The only real governments exist
ing were those of the several States.
Now it is all important to remember the charac-
ter of this Confederation and the condition of the
country at the time when the present Constitution
was formed, in order to understand the true mean
ing and intent of the latter. We are now consid-
ering the objects of its authors rather than the let
ter of the Constitution itself The Confederation
had been in operation some six years, and it had
failed to answer any good purpose solely because
people of any State to respect or obey its DEGREES
1t could, as was said at the time, 'declare every
ching and do nothing" Each State retained its
sovereign rights almost unimpaired, and was jeal-
Gus of and stronger than, the Federal power, and
the latter was therefore reduced to a mere shadow
1t was because of this condition of affairs that men
began to think of the necessity of stronger CEN
trail government. 1t was found that feeble Goa
liton between thirteen States would not suffice to
secure the peace and prosperity of the country and
it was thought essential to establish National
a larger portion of their sovereign powers. Two
parties, says Chief Justice MARSHALL, had already
arisen, "the one of which contemplated America as
"a nation, and labored necessarily to invest the
s'Federal head with powers competent to the pres.
s'ervation of the Union; the other attached itself
tto the State authorities When therefore the
Convention, on the recommendation of Congress,
assembled to consider what sort of Constitution it
was advisable to adopt, the two parties to which
we have referred at once arrayed themselves
against each other. On the opening of the session,
in order to test the question at issue, Mr.. RAN
DoLPH, of Virginia, submitted proposition to the
effect that National Government ought to be
established, with supreme Executive, Legislative
and Judiciary departments. Mr.. PATTERSON, of
New Jersey, submitted counter proposition,
in which he insisted that the Convention
should simply amend and enlarge the details of
the Confederation He desired that the indeped-
ence and sovereignty of The States should be
as little as possible inerfered with, and that the
Federal Congress should exercise its authority over
States rather than over individuals. Mr.. RAN
poLpH's views were sustained, however, by de-
cisve majority and it was because of this decision
that the preamble of the Constitution was made to
run in the of the people of the United States.
Acting upon the theory that it was necessary to
establish new, organic and national Govern
ment, which should he capable Of subduing any
thing like resistance TO its legitimate DEGREES the
Convention proceeded to frame the present Consti
+ution. After it had completed its labors it SUBJ
mitted its work to the Federal Congress, together
with an explanatory letter. The latter clearly
shows in what light the trainers of the Constitu-
tim regarded it. They say: ut is obviously i'm
sspractcable in the Federal Government of these
estates TO secure all rights of Independent souer-
neionty to cach and get prouids for the interest and
Hsafau of all. In all our delio'