Pomeroy weekly telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy, Meigs County, Ohio) 1860-1866, 1861-07-12

may. consistently with the national
/ Constitution, and therefore lawfully and
peacefully, withdraw from the Union
without the consent of the Union or
any other State They little disguise
the supposed right is to be exercised
only for just cause, because they
! themselves are to be the sole judges of
its Justice This is too thin to merit any
notice. With rebellion thus sugar
coated, they have been drugginy the
public mind of their section tor more
than thirty years, ana until at length
they have brought many good men 70 u
Willingness to take up arms against the
Government, the day after some assem-
blage of men have enacted the farcical
pretensc Of taking their State out of the
Union, who would have been brought to
no such thing the day before. This
sophism derives much, perhaps the
whole Of its currency from the assump-
tiou that there is some omnipotent and
sacred supremacy pertaining to State
Of our Federal Union.
Our States have neither more nor less
power than that reserved to them in the
Union by the Constitution, none of chem
ever having been State out of the
Union. The original ones passed into
the Union even before they cast off their
British Colonial independence, and the
new ones each came into the Union di-
rectly from Il condition of independence,
except Texas, and even Texas, in its
temporary independence, was never des-
ignated State. The new ones. only
took the designation of States on coming
into the Union-while that name Was
first adopted-for the old ones only
took the designation Of States on coming
into the Union-while that name WAS
first adopted for the old ones in and by
the Colonies, were declared to be free
and independent States; but even then
the object plainl y was not to declare their
independence Of one another or Of the
Union, but directly the contrary, as their
mutual action before, at the time and
afterwards, absolutely shows the express
pllghting of faith by each and all OF the
original thirteen in thA articles Of the
confederation two Years later That the
Union shall be perpetual is most con
elusive, having never been States either
In eXistance or in name outside of the
Union, whence the magical omnipotence
Of State Rights asserting claim to
power to lawfully destroy the Union it.
self, much is said about the sovereignty
Of the States, ,ut the word even, is not
in tie National Constitution, nor as is
believed in any Of the State Constitu-
tions. What is a sovereignty in the po-
litical sense Of the term? Would it be
far wrong to define it? 4 political COM
munity without political superior.
Tested by this, none of our States, ex-
cept Texas, ever was a sovereignty.-
Even Texas gave up the character on
coming into the Union, by which act
she acknowledged the Constitution Of
the United 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 status if
they break from this. They can only
do so against law by revolution. The
Union, and not themselves, separated,
procured their independence and their
liberty by conquest or purchase; the
Union gave each OF them whatever in
dependence and liberty it had; the Union
is older than any Of the States, and, in
fact, it created them as States.
Originally some dependent colonies
made the Union. and in turn the Union
threw off their ola dependence for them
and made them States such as they are.
Not one of them ever had q State Con
stitution independent of the Union
OF course it is not forgotten thHt all the
new States framed their Constitutions
before they entered the Onion. Never
the!ess, dependent upon and prcpara
tory to coming into the Union, unque5-
tionably the States have powers and
rights reserved to them in and by the
Nation Constitution; but among these
surely are not included all conceivably
powers, however mischieyous or des-
tructiyc, which are known in the world
at the time as the governmental powers
and certainly Il power to destroy the
Government itself has never been known
as governmental, but mere! y admins
tratlve power This relative matter Of
national power aul State rights, as a
principle, is no other than the principle
Of generality anl locality. Whatever
concerns the whole should be confined
to the whole-to the General Govern
ment-while whatever concerns only the
State should be left exclusively to the
State This is all there is Of riginal
principle about it. Whether the na-
tional Constitution, in defining bounda-
ries between the two, has applied the
princi lie with exact accuracy, is not to
be questioned. We are also bound by
that defining without question. What
is now combated is the position that
secession is consistent with the Consti-
tution-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 uni ust or
absurd consequences. The nation pur-
chased with money the countries of
which several Of these States were
formed. Is it just that they shall go
off without leaye-without refundiny q
The nation paid very large sums in the
aggresate-[ believe upwards of hun
dred millions-to relieve Florida of the
aboriginal tribes. Is it just that she
now go off without consent or without
making any return? The nation is now
in debt for money applied for the benefit
Of these so-called sec ID States in com
mon with the rest. Is it just either that
creditors shall go unpaid, CIR the remain
ing States pay? While a part of the
present national debt was contracted to
pay the old debts Of Texas, is it just
that she shall leave and pay no part Of
this herself? Again, if one State may
snnedn 81 NAV another and when oil