Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1861-03-06


portions OF the present Union now claim to Sc
cede from It'll All who cherish disunion sem
timents are now being educated to the exact
temper of doing this. Is there such perfect
identity OF interests among the States to COM
pose new Union as to produce harmony only
and prevent renewed secession Plainly, the
central idea of secession is the essence of an
archy. A majority held in restraint by Con-
stltutlonal checks and limitations and always
changing easily with the deliberate changes of
popular opinions and sentiments, is the only
true sovereign Of free people. Whoever re-
Jects 1t, does of necessity fly to anarchy or to
despotism. Unanimity is impossible. The
rule OF a minority as permanent arrange
ment, is wholly inadmiSsable, so that rejecting
the majority principle, anarchy and despotism
in some form is all that is left.
l do not forget the position assumed by
some that Constitutional questions are to be
decided by the Supreme Court, nor do deny
that such decisions must be binding in any
case upon the parties to suit as to the OBJ
Ject of that suit, while they are also entitled
TO very high respect and consideration in all
parallel cases by all other Departments of the
Government. And, while it is obviously pos
sible that such decision may be erroneous in
any given case, still the effect following it be-
ing limited to that particular case, with the
chance that 1t may be overruled and never be-
come precedent for other cases, can be bet
FER borne than could the evils of a different
practice. AT the same time the candid citi-
zen must confess, that if the policy of the
Government upon the vital questions, effect
ing the whole people, is to be irrevocably fix
ed by the decisions of the Supreme Court, the
instant they are made in ordinary litigation
between parties in personal actions, the peo
pie will have ceased to be their own rulers,
having to that extent practically resigned
their government into the hands of that emf
nent tribunal. Nor is there in this view any
assault upon the Court or the Judges. 1t is a
duty from which they may not shrink to de-
eide cases properly brought before them, and
it is no fault of theirs if others seek to turn
their decisions to political purposes.
One section Of our country believes that sla
very is right, and ought to be extended. while
the other believes that it is wrong, and ought
not to be extended. This is the only substan-
tial dispute, for the fugitive slave clause OF
the Constitution, and the law for the suppress
sion of the foreign slave trade, are each as well
enforced perhaps any law ever can be in a
community where the moral sense of the peo-
pie imperfectly supports the law itself. The
great body of the people abide by the dry
legal obligation in both cases and a few break
over in each. This think cannot be perfect
ly cured, and it would be worse in both cases
after the separation of the sections than before.
The foreign slave trade, now impcrfectly sup
pressed would be ultimately revived without
restriction in one section; while fugitive
slaves, now only partially surrendered, would
not be surrendered at all by tie other.
Physically speaking, we cannot separate, we
cannot remove our respective sections from
each other, nor build an impossible wall be-
tween them. A husband and wife may be di-
vorced and go out of the presence and beyond
the reach of each other. But the different
parts of our country cannot do this. They
cannot but remain face to face, and an inter-
course either amicablc or hostile must continue
between them. Is it possible then to make in
tercourse more advantageous or NOR salts
factory after separating than before Can
aliens make treaties easier than friends can
make laws? Can treaties be more faithfully
enforced between aliens than law among
friends Suppose you go to war, you can
not fight always, and when, after much loss on
both sides and no gain on either. you cease
fighting, the identical old questions as to
terms OF intercourse are again upon You.
This country, with its institutions, belongs to
the people that inhabit it. Whenever they
shall grow weary of the existing government,
they can exercise their Constitutional right of
it, or their revolutionary right to
or overthrow it. | cannot be ig-
norant OF the fact that many worthy and pa
triotic citizens are desirous of having the na-
tional Constitution amended. While | make
no recommendations of amendments, fully
the rightful authority of the people
over the whole subject, to be exercised in
either Of the modes prescribed in the instru-
ment itself, and / should, under existing cir
favor, rather than oppose, fair
being afforded the people to act
upon it. l will venture to add that to me the
Convention mode seems preferable, inasmuch
as il allows the amendments to originate with
the people themselves, instead only of permit
ting them to take or reject proposition orig
mated by others not especially chosen for the
purpose, and which might not be prec isely
such as they would wish 10 either accept or
refuse.
l understand proposed amendment to. the
which amendment, however, l
have not seen, has passed Congress, to the eff
feet that the Federal Government shall never
with the domestic institutions of the
States including that of persons held to SER
vice. To avoid misconstructlon of what
have said, / depart from my purpose not to
speak of particular amendments SO far as to
say, that, holding such provision to be now
implied as Constitutional law, have no obiec
ton to its being made express and irrevocable.
The chief magistrate derives all his authori-
ty from the people, and they have conferred
none upon him to fix terms for the separation
of the States. The people themselves can do
this also if they choose; but the executive as
such, has nothing to do with it. His duty is
10 administer the present Government as 1t
came to his hands and to transmit it unim-
paired by him to his successor. Why should
there not be a patient confidence in the ulti-
mate justice of the people Is there any bet
ter or equal hope in the world? In our pres
ent differences, is either party without faith of
being in the right If the Almighty Ruler of
Nations, with his eternal truth and Justice be
on our side of the North, or on yours OF the |
South, that truth and that justice will surely |
prevail by the judgment of this great tribunal, |
he American people. By the frame of the |
Government under which we live, this same |
people have wisely given their public servants |