East Saginaw courier. (East Saginaw, Mich.) 1859-18??, 1861-07-11

Declaration of Independence. Therein the
united colonies were declared to be free and
iadependent states But even than the object
plainly was not to declare their independence
of one another or of the Union, but directly the
contrary, as their mutual pledge aud Their
mutual action before, at the time and alter
wards abundantly show. The express plight
inc of faith by each and all of the original
thirteen States in the articles of confederation
two years later, that the Union shall be per-
petual, is most conclusive, having never been
stated either in substance or in name outside
of the Union Whence this magical omnipo-
tence of State rights, asserting claim OF pow
or TO lawfully destroy the Union itself? Much
is said about the sovereignty of the States, but
the word even is not in the national Constitu
ton, nor as is believed, in any of the State
constitutions. What is a sovereignty IN the
political sense of the term? Would il be far
wrong to define it a political community, with
out political superior? Tested by this, no
one of our Safes, except Texas, was sove-
reienty, and even Texas, gave up the charac-
ter on coming into the Union, 10y which act
she acknowledged the Constitution of the Uni
ted States and the laws and treaties of the
United States, made in pursuance of States
which have their status in the Union in pursu-
ance of tho Constitution, to be for her the SUI
preme law. The States have their status in
the Union and they have no other legal status
II they break from this, they can only do Sc
against law and by revolution. The Union
and not themselves separately procured their
Independence and liberty. BY conquest or
purchase tho Union gave each Of them what
ever of independence or liberty it has. The
Union is older than any of the States, aud in
fact it created them as States. Originally
some dependent colonies made the Union, and
in turn the Union threw off their old Deepen
dence for them, and made them States, such as
they are Not one Of them ever had State
constitution independent of the Union, OF
course, il is not forgotten that all the new
States formed their constitutions before they
entered the Union, nevertheless dependent up
on and preparatory to coming into the Union
Unquestonably the States have the powers
and rights reserved to them in and by the ma
tional Constitution.
But among these surely arc not included
all conceivable powers however mischiyous OF
destructive but, at most, such only as were
known in the world at the time as g0vcrnmon
tai powers, and certainly, power to destroy
the government itself had never been known
as government, as merely administrative
power. This relative matter Of national pow
er and state right, as Il principle, is no Other
! than the principle OF generality and locality
! Whatever concerns the whole should be con
fined to the whole general government, Will,
whatever concerns only the state should be lef
exclusively to the state This is all there is o.
original principle about it. Whether the ma
tional Constitution, in defining boundaries be
tween the two, has applied the principle witt
exact accuracy is not to be questioned. w,
are all bound by that defining without qucs
ton. What is now combattcd, is the position
that secession is consistent with the Constitu
TOMS lawful and peaceful. 1t is not con
tended there is any express law for it an,
nothing should ever he applied rs law whicl
leads 10 unjust and absurd Consequences. III,
nation purchase with money the committees
out of which several Of these states were form
ed Is it ust that they shall go off withou
! leave and without reinding? The nation pal,
very large sums in the aggregate, | believe
nearly hundred millions 10 relieve Florida o
the aboriginal tribes. Is it justice that sh
shall now be off without consent, or withou
any return? The nation is now in debt 70
money applied to the benefit of these so-calle,
seeding states, in common with the rest. |
it just, either that creditors should 90 unpaid
or the remaining States pay the whole?
part of the present national debt was contract
ed to pay the old debts of Texas 1t is ius
that she shall leave and pay no part Of thi
herself Again; if one state may secede, s.
may another and when all shall have seced
ed none is left to pay the debts.
Is this quite just to creditors? Did we no
tify them of this sage view of ours when W
borrowed their money? If we now recogniz
this doctrine by allowing the secceders to O
in peace, it is difficult to see what we can do
others choose to 90 or to eXtort terms upo
which they will promise to remain The Sc
ccders insist that our Constitution admits G
secession. They have assumed to make
national constitution of their own, in which, q
necessity, they have either discarded or retaiu
cd the right Of secession, as they insist it exist
in ours. If they have discarded it they thereb
admit that on principle it ought not to exis
in ours if they have retained it by their ow
construction of ours that shows that to be con
sistent, they must secede from one another
whenever they shall find il the easiest way q
settling their debts, or citecting any other sell
ish or unjust object. The principle itself
one Of disintegration, and upon which no gov
eminent can possibly endure. II all the state
save one, should assert the power to driv
that one out of the Union, it is presume
the whole class of politicians would at one
deny the power and denounce the act as til
greatest outrage upon state rights. But sur
pose that precisely the same act, instead o
being called driving the one out, should b
called the seeding of the others from tha
one, it would be exactly what the seccder
claim to do, unless indeed they make the poin
that the one, because it is a minority, ma
rightfully do what the others, because they al
a majority, may not rightfully do. These pc
liticans arc subtle and profound in the RICH,
of minorites. They are not partial to tha
power which made the Constitution, and speak
from the preamble, calling itself" We, til