The weekly Lancaster gazette. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1860-1863, 1861-07-11
NO. Is.

the day before. This sopLism derives
much, perhaps the whole, Of its currency
from the assumption that there is some
omnipotent and sacred supremacy per-
taining to each State Of our Federal Un.
ion.
Our States have neither more nor lesa
?ower than 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 before lh-y cast of their
British colonial dependence, and the new
ones each came into the Union directly
from condition Of dependence, except
Texas; and even Texas in its temporary
Independence, was KsSet desigustsd a
State,
The new ones only took the dssigna.
ton Of States on coming into the Union,
while that name was FIRST adopted foF the
old ones in and by the Colonies, which
were declared to be free and independen.
States; but eyrn then the object plairly
was no; TO declare their independence Of
one another, Or of the Union, but direct
ly The contrary, as their mutusl pledge
and their mutual action before, at the
time, and afterwards, abundantly shows.
The express plighting Of faith by each
and all Of tie original thirteen in the Ar.
ticles of Confederation, two years later,
that the Union shall be perpetual. is most
conclusive.
Haying never been States, either in
substance or in name, outside of the Un-
ion. whence this magical omDipotence Of
State rights, asserting claim Of power 10
lawfully destroy the Union itself? Much
is said about the sovereignty Of the States
but the word even is not in the Natimal
Constitution, nor, as is believed. in any OF
the State Constitutions. What is a sove.
reignly in the political sense Of the term?
Would it be far wrong % define it as a
political community wIhort politics!
superior?
Tested BY this. no one Of our States.
except Texas, ever was sovereign, aud
even Texas, gave up the character on
coming into tie Union, BY which Act she
acknowledged the Constitution OF the Uni
ted States and the laws and treaties Of the
United States made in pursuance of the
Constitution, to be FOR her the supreme
law Of the land.
The States have their status in the
Union. and they have no other legal stat
US. Ifthcy break from this. they can
ouiy do SO against the law by revolution.
The Union and not themselves separated
procured their independence, and their
liberty BY conquest or purchase. The
Union gave each Of ihem whatever inde.
prndeuce and liberty i; hal.
The Uuion is older thsn any Of the
States. and in fact 1t created them as
States. Originally some Independent col
ones made the Union, and in turn the
Union threw of their old dependence for
them and made them States. such as they
are. Not one Of them ever had State
Constitution independent Of the Union.
OF course it is not torgo ton that all the
new States framed their constitutions be-
fore they entered the Union. Nevertheless
dependent upon and preparatory to com
ing into the Ubion. unqueslionably the
States have the powers and rights reserv-
ed 10 them 10 and by tie National Constf-
tuition; but among these surely are not
included all concei vable power. however
mischievous or destructive, known in the
world at the time, as governmental pow
srs.
And cer'aiuy power to destroy the
Government itself had never been knownas
Governmental Merely administrative
power, this relative matter Of national
power and Stat rights, as principle is
no other than the principle Of generality
and locality. Whatever concerns the
Whole should be confded to the whole
to the general Government, while whatev-
er coucerns only the State, should De left
exclusively to the State, this is all there
is Of original principle about it..
Whether the National Constitution in
defining boundaries between the two has
applied the principle with exact accuracy
is not to lie questioned. We are also
houud by that defining without question.
What is now combated is the position
that secession is consistent with the Con-
sitution is lawful and peaceful. 1t is
not contendcd that there is any express
law for it, and nothing should ever be i'm
piled as law which leads TO unjust or alb
surd consequences.
The nation purchased with money the
countries out Of which several of these
States were formed Is it just that they
shall 60 off without leave. and without re-
funding? The naticn paid very large
sums (in the aggregate | believe of a
hundred miIIions) to r lieve Florida Of
the aboriginal tribes. Is it just that she
shall now go off without consent, OF with
out making any return?
The nation is now in debt for money
applied 10 the benefit OF these so.callgd
seeded States, in common with the rest.
1 Is it Just either that creditors shall go un-
paid, or the remaining States pay the
whole par. Of the present national debl
which was contracted TO pay the old debts
of Texas? Is itjust that she shall leave
and pay no part Of this hersel
Again. If one state, may seoede. SO may
another; and when all shall have sscsded
none is left to pay the debts. Is this
quite inst to creditors? Did we rally
them in this sage view Ofonrs, when we
) borrowed their money? If We now re-
cognze this doctrine by allowing the Sc
ceders to 60 in peac0, is is dtl'ult 10 see
$hat we can do, if others choose 70 60 OF
to exiort terms upon which they will prom
A ise TO remain. A ..-