Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1862-06-26
Chr Rntlaad 9mala.
THURSDAY MORNING, JUNE 2t
MIR. DIXON'S RESOLVE.

Dixon of Connecticut, which lies over for
consideration:
Resolred, That all acts or ordinances
of secession, alleged to have been adopt
ed by any Legislature or Convention of
the people of any State, are, as to this
Federal Union, absolutely null and void
and that while such acts may and do SUBJ
ject the individual actors therein to for
FIXTURES and penalties, they do not in any
degree, affect the relations of the State
wherein they purport to have been adopt
ed to the Government Of the United
States, but are, as to such Government,
acts Of rebellion, instruction, and hostili-
ty on the part of the individuals engaged
therein, or giving assent thereto; and
that such states are, Notwithstanding such
acts and ordinances, members of the Fed
eral Union, and as such are subject to all
the obligations and duties imposed upon
them by the Constitution of the United
States; and the loyal citizens of such
States are entitled to all the rights and
privileges thereby guaranteed or con-
ferred. ...
The New York Tribune of Monday
last, prints the above, and adds that
error is rarely dangerous when unaccom-
panied with large admixture of TRUTH"
and cites the resolution of Mr. Dixon as
an illustration. The "error" which the
Tribune detects and attempts to expose,
rs the assertion that the rebelious States
"are, Notwithstanding such acts and ordi-
nances, members of the Federal Union,
and as such, are subject to all the obliga-
tons and duties imposed upon them by
the Constitution of the United States"
&c, The Tribune insists that the seced-
ed States are telo de Sc, and says Senator
Dixon has failed to convince it that
"South Carolina is at this moment a State
in the Union." The Tribune illustrates
its positioe in this wise
"1f Mr.. Dixon were informed that one
OF his neighbors or friends had Just killed
himself by pistol or poison, and, running
to view the body, were stopped and button
held by logic-chopper who should say,
Mr.. d., l will prove to you that your
friend is not Dead" he would naturally
request that the demonstration be a brief
one. "Why, l prove it thus" responds
Logic: al. No man has right to take
his own life; 2. All illegal acts are null
and void; 8. Your friends suicide, being
In plain violation of law, is of no effect
4. Consequently, he is still alive he
might possibly, in his haste, accuse the
.,alr-splitter of trihing with very grave
subject" Il
Now we submit that the above is as
unfair as it IS 1iippant. The very ques-
ton at issue is, whether the State be feto
de Sc in consequence of having passed an
ordinance of secession, and yet the Tri-
bune makes his antagonist liken the case
to an individual who has beyond all pos
sible dispute committed suicide! 1t is
always easy to win the victory by setting
up man Of straw to admit the point in
your favor. 1t may be considered a fair
mode of augmentation by the Tribune,
but we don't see it in that light The
two cases supposed have no sort of anao-
gy. The Tribune of course means to dis
cuss the question from legal and consti-
tutional stand point, and not as one of
mere fact to be made up from loose opin-
ions.
In the first place we ask, how does it
follow, that were it possible for South
Carolina to break the ligature which binds
her to the Union, she thereby destroys
her existence as a State? She was
State before she was a member of the
Union,-how is it, that, ceasng to be
State in the Union, if that were possible,
she ceases to be State at all?
In the next place, if an act of secession
is void by reason of its being unconstitu-
tonal, how can it be said to affect or even
disturb, in legal point of view, the con-
stitutional relation of the State to the
Union? How is it that an act of seces-
sion which is wholly void, is nevertheless
operative not only to take the State out of
the Union, but to destroy it besides The
only difference we can discern between
the position of the Tribune and that of
JEFF. Davis is, that while both insist that
South Carolina has gone out of the Union
by reason of her act of secession, the
latter insists that she is still State, while