Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1861-04-16

,,h.r, that !, wa. National. instead of a Fed
NuNBER III.


Another. that il was National, instead Of Fed
| eral Government which is denied:
| at il very probable, says Montesquien, that man.
kind would have been obliged at length to live con-
ssanty under the government OF single person, had
thew not contrived kind of constitution that has
all the internal advantages of Republican. togeth-
er with the external force Of AOnsrehial Govern
ment / mean Confederate Republic. This form OF
government is a convention by which several small
er States agree to become members OF larger one
which they intend to form. Il is kind OF assem-
blage of societies. that constitute new one capable
of increasng by new associations, till they arise to
such degree of power a. to be able 10 provide LOT
| the security OF the united body.
THE Sdts may be destroyed on one side and not
on the other; the ConedeTGcy may DC dissosced ana
| the confederdtes preserUe their soUeTet9nfy
Hamilton says, agreeing with Aontesquien:
..Tbe definition of Confederate Republic seems
SIMPLY to be an dSSes7bng Of Socssiss, or an asso-
citation of one or two more states into one State.
The extent notifications AID oo)ects OF tne Feoerai
suthoriv are mere matters OF discretion So long
he Separate orqanizqtion Of the members be notGbOssd
40 long as IL exists BY constitutional Deces Ity for
local purposes, though it should be in perfect subor
dination to the general authority Of the Union, it
vvonld still be in fact and theory an ass cid0n Of
S,otes or a Confedsrucy The proposed Constitution
ca far iron, implying an abolition Of The State Govern
Tnsnts makes them constituent parts Of The national SOU
| ereiqlty by allowing them direct representation
in tie Senate and leaves IN their p ssesso certain
|
ponds IN euey rational ipOrt Of s terms Nth the idea
IAN entire consol lnstion Of the States, into one
complete national sovereignty, would imply an en-
tire subordnation OF the paris and whsever pow
ers might remain in them. would be altogether de-
Dendent on the general teA But ss the plan of the
convention aims only at partial union consoli-
daton. the State Governments would clearly retain
ali the rights of sovereignty which they before had.
and whic. were not by that act, exclusively dele
| rated 10 the United States.
On examining the first relation. il appears one
| hand that the Constitution ia to be founded on the
| assent and ratification Of the people of America,
given BY deputies elected for the special purpose
but on the other that this assent and ratification Is
to be given by the people, not hfdtrdaas eompos-
ina one entire adtnB but composing The dstsnct ana
independei States u shich they respeciUey oeloag
is 10 be the assent and ratification # s ssre-f esSss'
| derived from the supreme authority 10 eaen SsAte
the authority Of the people themselves. -, s nc, -
therefore establishing the Constitution WIZ nos u
a national but federal act. That H ras % Ieu I.J
and not national act, these terms are unosr-
by the objectors the act OF tne peoPls. on. .1-
90 many independents States, not As yosn .9s;isrs -
oreoais nntior ia obvious from this single : s
go ~, !, Il 20 -esnIt neither from the oecisOn y.
,no;o-,. az tina neoule of the Un1on' nor iso -. -
of Eu1;ority of the Satss IL nluss
,naa,ous assent of the several pa y
@ M otherwise from their oriln&,y "a
" uneIt's Is. Lsro expressed, not oy ieSlsianVe
seus 'i.. " -, nv that of the people ihemst Ner.
tbs people regarded in this % ,bs as
~ o. ,,aon the will Of the MAJORITY @ 1a .ns
people OF tne IS the majority in each State
in the same MAINS. ;orrv and the win Of the maior
mus. pll'l l5ar,;ned either By comparison OF the
J;'Susi votes or by considering US VII % sne
majority OF 's ,,s oeooe Of the United States Eei
%flSs o Ssss rs Gs adopted Each Ss'' :, rat
sd independent OF al others ana oy o oe ooa,nd os
oDoy .,,farvact In this relation then the new
oostituon ~ win, if established, be federal and
not 4 national Constitution"
To render the Conssitsn n ssla less obnoxious e
! unequally t,xed. page 20.
This inequality would Of itself be sufficient y
America, 20 work the eventual destruction OF ine
, Union, if any mode OF enforcing = ~;no
states coud not long consent to gsaaH as =, !.
upon principle which distrihgtec tns psJ pssi,lsssd
! | dsas with so unequal shand; Which We. sA's--