The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1861-07-11

that the supposed right is to be exercised My for
just cause, themselves to be sole Judges of its
Justice, is too thin to merit any notice. With re-
belion thus sugar-coated they have been drugged
the minds of their section for more than thirty
years, until. at length, they have brought many
good men to willingness to take up arms against
the government, the day after some assemblage OF
men have enacted the farcical act of taking their
State out of the Union, who could have been
brought to no such thing the day before. This
sophism derives much, perhaps the whole, of its
currency from the assumpt on that there is some
omnipotent and sacred supremacy pertaining to
each State of our Fderal Union. Our States have
neither more nor less power tha that reserved to
them in the Union by the Constitution, no one of
them ever having been State out of the Union.
The original ones passed into the Union even be-
fore they cast off their British dependence, and the
new came into the Union directly fror, a con-
dtion Of dependence, excepting Texas, and even
Texas, in its temporary INDEPENDENCE, never
designated as State. The new ones only were
designated States OIL coming into the Unon while
that name only first adopted for the old ones
in and by the Declaration of independence.
Therein the United Colonies were declared free
and Independent States, but even then the object
plainly was not to eclare their delendence of
one another of the Union, but directly the con-
trary, their mutual pledge and their mutual
action, before, at the time, and afterward, abun-
dainty show. The express plighting of faith by
each and al of the original thirteen States in the
articles of confederation, two years later. that the
Union shall be perpetual is most conclusive.
Having never been States, either in substance or
name, outside the Union, whence this magical
ornnipotence of States rights asserting claim of
power to lawfully destroy the Union
Much is said about the sovereignty of the
States. but the word even is not in the national
constitution, nor it is believed Il anv of the
State constitutions. What is sovereignty in the
particular sense Of the term Would it be far
wrong to declare it political comm unity without
political superior? Tested by this, no one of our
States, except Texas, a sovereignty, and even
Texas gave up the character coming into the
Union, by which act she acknowledged the con-
stitution Of the United States, and laws and treat
les of the United States made in pursuance of the
constitution, to be for her supreme law.
The States have their status in the Union, and
they have no other legal status. If they break
from this, they only do so against law by revolu-
ton The Union and not themselves separately
procured their independence and their liberty by
conquest or purchase. The Union gave each of
them whatever of independence and liberty it has.
f The Unionis older than any of the States, and
IN fac:, it created them States. Originally,
some dependent colonies made the Union, and, in
return, the Union threw off their old depend ence
for them, and made the States such as they are
Not one of them ever had a State constitution in
dependent of the Union. Of course it is not for
gotten that all the States formed their consi-
tutions before tiey entered the Union, nevertheless
dependent on and preparatory to coming into the
Union.
Unquestionably the States have powers and
rights reserved to them by the national consttu
ton, but among these surely are not included all
conceivable powers, however mischcvous or de-
structivc, but at most such only as were known in
the world at the time governmental powers and
certainly power to destroy the government itself
had never been known as n governmental or as
merely administrative power. This relative mat
ter Of national power and State rights is princ-
ple-is no other than principle of generality and
locality. Whatever concerns the whole should be
confined to the whole general government while
whatever concerns the State should be left exclu-
svely to the State. This is all there is of the
original principle about it. Whatever the national
constitution says in defining the boundaries be-
tween the two, as applied to the principle, with
exact accuracy, is not to be questioned. We are
all bound by that definition without question.
What is now combatted is the position that
secession is consistent with the constitutions
lawful and peaceful. 1t is not contended that
there is any express law for it. and nothing should
ever be implied as law which leads to unjust and
absurd consequences. The nation purchased with
money the country out of which several of these
States were formed Is it just that they should go
off without leave, or without rcfunding The ma
ton paid very large sums-in the aggregate. be-
lieve, nearly SlOO,OOO,OOO-to relieve Florida
from the aboriginal tribes. Is it just that she
should now 90 eff without consent, OF without any
return The nation is now in debt for money ap
piled for tine benefit of these so called seeding
States in common with the rest. Is it just either
that creditors shall 60 unpaid. or the remaining
States pay the whole part of the present
tiona debt was contracted to pay the old debts of
Texas. Is it just that she shall leave and pay no
part of tins herselff
Again, if one State ma, secede, so may another
ond when all have seeded, is left to pay the
debts. Is this quite just to creditors did we
notify them Of this sage view of ours when we
borrowed their money? IL We now recognize this
doctrine by allowing the seceders to go in peace,
it is difficult to see what do If Others choose
to co. or to extort terms upon which they will prom
Use to remain
The seceders insist that our constitution admits
of secession. They have assumed to make ma
tional constitution of their own, in which of ne
cessity they have either discarded or retained the
right of secession. As they insist it exists in ours,
if they have discarded it, they thereby admit that
on principle it ought not to exist III If they
have retained it, by their own construction OF ours.
that shows that to be consistent they must secede
from me another when they shall find IL the easiest