Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1861-03-12

the national representatives out In tHiS par
ticular act, they are TO be thrown into the :orlI
of individual delegations, from so many DIS
tinct and coeQuaI bodies polite From TIM
aspect of the government, it appears 10 be OF
mixed character presenting ut least Us u'a",
federal rs national features.
The difference between a federal and ma
tional government, NJ it relates to the operation
Of the government, il, BY the adYe'sarles
the plan Of the Com"entiun, supposed 10 con
sisi in this, that in the fOrulcr the powers op
crate on the political bodies composing th'
Cunfederacy, in their political capacities; IT
the latter, on the individual citizens composing
the nation in their individual! capacities. Or
trying the Constitution by this criterion, u
falls under the natiola|, mot the federal character
though perhaps not 50 completely as hos beer
understood In several caScs ard particularly
in the trul of controversies 10 which States
may he parties, they must be viewed and pro
ceeded against in their collective and politlca
capacities only. Eut the operation OF the gov
ernment on the propIe III their individual ca
pacit;es, in It's ordin'rv and most essential pro
o.edines, will, OH the whole, in the sense OF us
opponents, designate it. III ta;s feiat'oh' IL
tuual government.
But, If the government be national. with re-
gard to tic operation Of It's powers, It changes
its aspect again, VIXEN nc contemplate II IN Te,
iation to the extent OF irs powers. ihe IDEA OF
a National Government involves in Il, not Only
an authority over the individual citizens, out
an ind.tini,. supremacy over al persons ard
things 50 far rs they a." objects .: !ew'u! gov
ernment
Among ;rolle consolidated into one nation,
this supremacy is completely vested in The ma.
tional legislature. Among COMMUNITIES uh'teu
for particular purposes, il IS vested part! III
the general ard partly i'll the municipal legiSia'
lures. In the former CASE, al local authorizes
are subordinate 10 the supreme, and may Dc
controlled, directed. or abolished by t ut plea
sure. In the latter. the inca! or municipal au'
thorities form distinct and Independent portions
Of supremacy, no More subject within thcir re-
soectivc spheres II the general authority, than
the general authority l. subject 10 them within
It's own sphere. IN this relation, lhen, the
proposed government caann: be deemed MT
tionuL one, Since It's jurisdiction extends 10 Ger
tain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the
several States q rcsiduary ard inyioiablc soYe-
reicnty over all other objects 1t il true, that
in controversies relating 10 the boundary be.
tween the two Jurisdictions, the tribunal which
is ultimately to decide is 20 be established un-
tier the General Government. Bnt this does
not change the principle Of tie CASE. The &c
cisoa is to ne impariay made, according TO
tho rules % tue Constitution, and all the usual
and most eiirctual precautions are teken 10 Sc
cure this impartiu!ify. Some such tribunal Is
clearly essential to prevent an appeal to tho
4 6; nj
that it ought 10 he established under the gen.
erul rather than under the local governments;
or, to speak more properly. that it could be
,nGle safely established under the first alone. il
i p'sitlou no: likely to BE- co;nbattcd.
If we try the Constitution by lis lest reia-
ton to the authority by which amendments
are to be made, wc ind il Dvi;l;er wholly RI
tiyna!, nor wholly FEDERAL Were it wholly
the supreme All! nltima!e authority
would reside in the naqj0ritg If the people Of
the Union; ami this authority would be COM
petent, at all times, Ike that Of majority Of
every national society. TO al:rr or abolish its
established government. Nrr" II wholly icde
raj, oil the Other hand tiie cpnc!ir cncc Of each
State IN the Union would Ec essential TO every
alteration that would DC binding on all. The
mode provided by the plan f the Convention
IS not founded on either of these principles. In
requiring more than majority, and partlcu-
arIy in computing the proportion by States,
lot by citi:tM, it departs from tie mlionGl
mi advances towards tie JedGrul character. In
'endcrins tic concurrence CT lass than the
whole number Of States sufficient, II loses
Igain tire Je,lerut ard partakcs Of the nnt;gnal
character.
The proposed Constitution, therefore, ever
when tested By the rules laid down 10y il, an
agoniats. ia, in sIric!ness, neither national
,0r federal Constitution, bat a imposition
# both. III its foundation It is federal 70: ra
ional; in the sources from which the ordina.
V powers Of the Government are drawn, il is
,arty federal and partly national; in the ope-
alton O. these powers Il IS rs'lGn.!, not fcta-
al III The eytcnt Of Them again, II is federal,
Tot nationa! and, finally, in the authoritative
node Of introducing amendments, it is neither !
riioliy federal nor wholly national"
hr. Madison in h!> letter to Mr. Trist, in
$780, says:
Il paItakr o. wonder tliq, :he man you name
hould slew secession in the l:i''; tlizntoiei. !
rhe essential difference b2twsc'. u free g0r crn !
ucnt aud p government not free Is that the !;
0rmer is founded on coIniacr, The parties 10 !
which are mutually and equally honnd by j.. !
Neither Of them. therefore have greater right |!
o break oil from the bargain t!:Gn the other OF
,thers have 10 hold them 10 il. And certainly !,
here i. nothing in the Virginia resolutions or
7gS adverse 20 ibis principle, which is that Of !;
ommon seI:.c and common jli>tlcr The faiacy
which dramSa different conclusion lies in con. !
ounding L single party with the parties to a !
constitutional compact OF the United States
The latter, having m.aIe the compact, may do |
shat they will with il. Tie former. Is vny one
# the parties, oTC; fidelity toit tlirricased BY
consent or ailSoiecd hy All intolrrable abuse Of |!
he power created. 1t is high tine thai the
lain 10 sccede ct will should bc pat down by /.
,uhlic opinion.
In his letter 10 Mr. Cabsii, in 1881, he said :
81 know not whence !ilo iGel could proceed !!
nat cp',c red in the doctrine that, although
State could not nnllfy inv 81 the Union. 1t
las right 10 scre1e from Tire Union. Both
pring froiu the SAN: pui~oHDnS rot
I'm his letter 10 NJ. Everett, in 1880, Mr.
Madison said:
ut (ttle CunStitu'ion) Was formed not by
he Governments Of The component States, as
ne FeGrill Government I"r which it was sub
tl,u,ed was formed rnT was it formed By a
majority o. the pr"p: Oh the United StateS, as
single community. in tic manner Of coli.
!oltated Government. II was formed bY the
States-thst is By the people i'll egch Of the
States, acting in their highest sovereiss capa.
:ity, and formed consequently byt the sarl- gu.
hority which tur";rti the State constitutions
Being thus derived from the same source
IS the constitutions ol the States, i, has within
ZACH State the same authority rs tho coustitn-
ion OF the State, and is us much cons;ilu.
on in the strict sense Of the term, within its
prescribed sphere. es the constitutions of the
States are within their respective Spheres, bur
With this curious aud essential difference, that
being compact among States in their highest
sovereign capacity, and constituting the peo-
pie thereof fiue people for curtain purpose, u
ammo: be altered or an"ulied at Tie acN efths
States tn3i0idua}iy. es the constitution OF a
State may be 4. It's ind 7;d,al will
Mr.. Msdisnn on :hr 18th day oi March, 1859.
%rote to Daniel Webster upon TIE RECEIPT OF
l.