Prescott journal. [volume] (Prescott, Wis.) 1861-1871, 1861-07-10

States except Texas was a sovereignty,
and even Texas gave up the character on
coming into the Union, by which act she
acknowledged the Constitution OF the
United States and laws and treaties OF
the United States, made in pursuance OF
the Constitution, to be forever her SUI
preme law. "a,
The States have their status in, the
Union and they have no other legal stat
us. If they break from this they only
do so against law by revolution. Inc
Union, and not themselves separated,
procured their independence and Their
liberty. By conquest or purchase the
Union gave each of them whatever OF IN
dependence and liberty it has. The I'm
ion is older than any Of the States and in
. fact it created item as States. Originally
some dependent colonies made the Union
and in return the Union threw OFT their
old dependence for them and made the
States such as they are. Not one OF
them ever had State Constitution inde-
pendent ofthe Union. Of course, it is
not forgotten that all the new States
formed their Constitutions before they
entered the Union, nevertheless depend
ent on and preparatory to coming into
the Union. Unquestonably the States
have the powers and rights reserved to
them by the National Constitution, but
among these surely are not included all
conceivable powers, however mischlevous
or destructive. But at most such on y as
were kaown in the world at that time as
governmental powers, and certainly pow
er to destroy the Government itself, had
never been known as governmental, a
m erely administrative power. This re-
lative matter OF National power and
States rights as principle, is no other
than principle of generality and local.
tv. Whatever concerns the whole should
be confined to the whole General Gov
ernment, while whatever concerns the
State should be left exclusively to the
State. That IS all there is left of the
original principle about it. Whatever
the national convention is defining the
boundaries between the two as applied to
the principle with exact accuracy is not
to be questioned. We are all bound by
that definit n will out question. What
is now combatted is the position that Sc
cession is consistent with the Constitu
ton. is 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 countries out of which
several Of these States were formed, it is
just that they should 60 off without leave
or without refunding? The nation paid
very large sums, in the aggregate, l be-
ieve, nearly 500, 100000, to relieve
Florida from the aboriginal tribes. Is it
Just that she should now go off without
consent or without any return? The ma
ton is now in debt for money applied for
the benefit of these so called seeding
States, in common with the rest. Is it
just either that creditors shall 90 unpaid
or the remaining States pay tho whole (!
A part of the. present national debt was
contracted to pay the old debt of Texas
Is it Just that she shall leave and pay no
part of this herself! Again, if enc State
may secede SO may another, and when
all shall have seeded, none is left TO pay
the debts. Is this quite just to creditors?
Did we notify them of this sage view of
ours when we borrow their money? If
we now recognize this doctrine by allow
ing the seceders to 90 in peace it is diff
cult to see what we can do if others choose
to 90, or to extort terms upon which they
will promise to remain. The seceders
insist that our Constitution admits Of
secession. They have assumed to make
q national constitution of their own in
which, Of necessity, they have either dis
cardcd or retained the right Of secession
as they insist Il exists in ours. If they
have discarded it they thereby admit that
on principle it ought rot 10 exist in ours.
If they have retained it by their cons rue
ton Of ours it shows that 20 be consistent
they must sccede from one anether when
they shall find it the easiest way of set
ting their debts or effectiDg another SCI
fish or unjust object.
he principle Itself is one OF dls,nte-
grafton and on which no Government
can endure. If all the States save one
should effect the power to drive that one
out Of the Union, it is presumed the
whole class of seeded politicians would
at once deny the power and denounce the
act as the greatest outrage upon State
rights. But suppose that precisely the
same act, instead Of being called driving
one out, should be called the " seeding"
of the others from the one, it would be
exactly what the seceders claim to do, un-
less, indeed, they make the point that
the one, because it is minority, may
rigAtfallp do that which the others, be-
cause they are the majority, may not
rightfuIly do.
These politicians are profound in the
rights of minorities. They are not par
tial to that power which made the Con-
stitution and speaks from the preamble
calling itself ave, the people," 1t may
well be questioned whether there is to-
day a majority of the legally qualified
voters of. any State, except, perhaps,
South Carolina, in favor of disunion -
There is much reason to believe that the
TTnion mon ara IN n majority In roonv