Daily national Democrat. [volume] (Marysville, Calif.) 1858-1861, 1861-07-24
States Rights versus State sovereignty,

Sthtes ItISntS versus State sovereignty.
The most common of the fllac;es which
The leaders Of the rebellion seek TO impress
upon the minds Of the Southern people is that
The doctrine Of State sovereignty is synony-
nous with that Of State rights. Netting can
ee further from the truth than any such as
sumption; bat The pcrtinacity with which
traitors have sought to enforce it, has driven
many hooest minded people, even in this
region, into the adoption of a crude notion
that States rights and the tangled theo
ny of State sovereignty are one and the same
thing. There can be no sovereignty where
the community claiming to exercise it have
voluntarily or otherwise merged any one Of
its high attributes into general fund, which
/ is to be held for the benefit of all subscrib-
ing parties. Lincoln is undoubtedly right
when he declares that no State ever had
State "Constitution, independent of the
! Union" 1t is either afiectation or stupidity
which would lead any man TO deny that dec
| liration. The States as such, wore unknown
PREVIOUS W Tic Vi lUupcUuCDCe,
that Declaration itself was the result of
Union; sovereignty, if any, was assumed upon
the strength which that Union gave, and all
Subsequent Constitutions were made under
the protection Of either the confederated
Union or under the present national Union,
which has guided us TO the highest pitch Of
prosperity.
Sovereignty may be claimed for the States
as they existed under the old confederation;
utthat confederation having been failure
as it could "not raise revenue, support the
public credit, regulate trade or commerce, or
provide for the wants and safety of the coun
try'-it became necessary to form that "more
perfect Union" which was consummated by
the people of the United States" in the adop-
ton of the present constitution.
Whatever might be admitted as to the
sovereignty of the States previous to this
time, certainly they can lay no claim to it
afterwards, for they specifically stripped
! themselves Of all its highest attributes, by
! investing the Federal Government with the
sovereign power 20 lay and collect taxes
duties, imposts and excuses, to provide for the
common defence, to borrow money, to
regulate external and internal commerce, to
say what rule of naturalization should apply.
to libcrate bankrupts in all the States to coin
money, to declare war, keep armies and ma
yies, and in short to do everything which
nation may do. The people reserved to
themselves, in general way all powers
which they had not through their consttu-
tion delegated TO the Union, or which the
Constitution itself did not forbid them frcm
exercising.
1t is from these "reserved powers" that the
doctrine Of States Rights has grown, and it
will be seen that, so far from being founded
in Sovereignty" Of their own they are in
debted for their their origin to adrerSe SOW
ereignty, or in other words to Constitution
which the people of the States ordained.
But the doctrine of States Rights having
been established as sound and just, the
wretched bunglers at revolution have sought
10 use it as the packhorsc of that monstrous
myth ana tissue Of absurdities, known in very
ate days as State Sovereignty. 1t is shame
full that in loyal State it should be deemed
necessary to confute such revolutionary here
sies but the same demon of anarchy who
has perverted the reason of large portion
of the Southern people, holds secret sway in
the bosoms of many in our own good State,
and renders it necessary that arguments
should be presented, which, in State of
sound national mind, would be supercroga
| InrN.