Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1863-04-04

Ir III II
c,n.sliuslpn !. The aatrnai lie, e.le ltte brlng
h, me supems law el he lsn'l-sHd be ~saldhs
a hid auI geekless spphlst ehu would undertake
a. hud ihst national lie anyshegs else ihen the
s.shis uhleh tke uansltalha, teseltes a. lhe
slslss 90 lhe people afe eqtsly p9mlHehenae,l
Ia hat llls. Toe lhey ale equally DECLARED "a be
psfls 81 tie supreme las Ut the land For thia
fs,san, al idea 81 = sap1emaes ei national
rights ~ powers - Interests, Nhsn FUNDED 80
s,,neshins at amifared la tie Cspstiuilon, il
pnfely visionary. ~ duly 81 loyalty cen f's
-lbly be peicatei ct an claim tht !. tot
foun.led IN the supreme la ~ the land. WHIT
a i once a.oeFtained what are the tights aud
n,wer. vested ia the National authufties by the
Constitution, Ties are psrts OF the supreme la
aud our loyalty" J. due Ia them When ~e
know What ute he rights aud lH'~sls reseryed 10
the States 90 the people-aud Ne know that 'he,
are the whole residue of all possible political
right. aud powers-they are equally the objects
of our "loyalty.' for tie selfsame reason.
namely. thes are parts of Ihe supreme law OF the
land Loud appliance
Again. The Constitution not only contains
some political powers and the rights granted TO
the Federal Government, and a reservation of all
other political powers and rights to the States OF
the people; but il also embraces rights OF persons
and property guaranteed to every citizen in his
individual capacity; and these arc equally made,
not by implication but expressly, parts OF the su-
prcme law Of the land and are therefore
equally the objects of our loyalty" All pre-
tence therefore of any paramount authority in
the Central Government to override these per
sonal rights of the citizen, to claim our loyal
ty' in disregard of these coordinate parts of the
supreme law, is perversion OF the very idea OF
American loyalty. lCheers. As well might
the citizen claim, because the Constitution has
made his personal rights part Of the supreme law
thar therefore the loyalty of his neiehbor is due
TO him alone. rs the Government can claim that
LOYALTY i due solely, or chiefly. or primarily, or
ultimately to the functions which II is appointed
to perform The rights of the Government, the
rights of the States, and the rights OF individuals,
all and equally, are comprehended in the SUI
prcmc law of the land and our loyalty is due to
that law, TO the whole and every part of il, and
public officers are in the same sense and for the
same reason bound to obey every Got and title
Of IT, IGrcat applause.
These positions are very plain and familiar
truths; too familiar, perhaps You will say, TO be
trca;ed. But in these days nothing that is true
is too fundamental or too plain to be inculcatcd.
The extravagant language and ideas that arc
current in the mouths of even sensible people on
this subject of LOYALTY would have exceeded all
capacity of belief in any other period than this.
If one were to undertake To reduce this language
and these ideas to something like adcInilc moral
proposition, Il would be found that the doctrine
Is something like this. In n time Of war. when
there arc great public dangers. the rights of the
States aud of individuals must give way; and II
those who administer the Government are salts
fed that public necessity requires them to use
powers that transcend the limits Of the Consfiiu
ton. he who does not acquicsce in their judy
m,ut or who questions their authority 10 do par
ticular acts l. "disloyal' citi1cu. Laughter.
This statement of the doctrine i the best that
know how To make: for know not how else 3,
Interpret or So apply the dcnnnciations which W.
find In the proceedings of public meetings, in The
columns of party newspapers, and In the common
speech and action of very many persons. meet
only point 20 tho utter prohibition that u nj
tempted to be placed upon all discussion of an,
plan for bringing this dreadful civil war Ia
close excepting by the particular method o
fighting; or Ia I'll emanncr IN which the tcrm'
"traitor" and "sccessionists' are hurled NJ nj
who question the policy and lawfuncss of Oh,
methods pursued by the Government In the pros
ccution of the war For myself, ! do not pro
f,ss Ia have n definite opinion, as YET. concerning
several of the modes In which peace might safe
Nv be sought. Hut know not what right have
legally or morally, To say that my neighhor shall
not discuss such aqucsiion, or shall not act upon
II at the polls. or shall he denounced as "dis
loynl" because his opinions on these subjects diff
fer from mine IL Is Ia me very plain that thi'
whole effort of a dominant party To control opin
ion bv such means can. under such institutions
as ours, lead 90 hut one of two results--the 6
Enlistment of dcspotism Of very had kind. oi
the overthrow of the political power Of those who
resort 10 sneh methods. Either the institution.
Of the country will perish, or the party which nm
dcrtakcs to reprcss all freedom of discussion will
perish. ICheers. hope we shall make up ON
minds to destroy the party and save the institu
tions. Great applause. I've will do II.
But of this hereafter.
Let me return to this new doctrine OF "loyal
IT," which requires u 10 acquesce IN silence IA
the inlament OF public servants ~ To what tn,
public I'VE essits require. even Ia the extent oi
overlooking erent lntractions ol the Constitution
This doctrine entirely ignores the purpose Ton
which The Constitution imposed certain stringent
limitations the powers OF the National Gov
eminent IN order 10 explain this IL will he ne
ccsstry To descend from general reasoning ~
particular illustrations
The Constitution after cGnfertng certain vel
defrel political powers upon the Federal Gov
eminent declares that all other political power'
are reserved u the States or the people: aud i
further secures 90 every citizen certain inaliena
bic rights OF person and property. which II recog
ni,es as inherent IN the citizen forever. be,ouo
al possible control of that Government, Now
does any one suppose that this was done without
= serions putuose2 Does any MN imagine tha
IL WIS done tor what j. vueularly ilel hun
combef" Do Won believe that u was done witt
mental reservation of the doctrine ol public ne
cessity standing behind the Constitution. an,
retlv To strike il down froan it, supreme confro
over Us and our atfdrsl Lee me suggest To yuu
my fellow citizens, that YOU cannot study IN,
Constitution aud the purposes ot the great sener
alton who made IL. without seeing that the yer,
object of all this careful provision for rights tn,
were placed beyond the reach OF the Central Gov
eminent was u exclude forever this doctrine o
public necessity as a measure Of The po,rers thai
were conferred upon that Government Cheers
use this language deliberately. affirm thai
when the Constitution repeated the words al
Magma Charta. not As a statute. but rs fxcC
provision of fundamental law, and declared tht
ono person shall Ice deprived of life. liberty OF
property without due process ct law'--ii mean
to m Ike a rule for III time md all circumstances
shutting he door forever against any suppose,
publi, necessity for vioatng the rights OF IN,
citizen In like manner. affirm that when th,
Constitution reserved ta the States OF The pes,l,
MI POLITICAL powers not granted 60 the Fedora
Government. il meant to preclude every grouus
OF necessity for the assumption 10y that Govern
ment OF Abe poser> thus witl,he,d d. Applause
In fact, the i,lea Ut twfitten Consultation
hxei aud supreme LAWS utterly irteconcinbl,
with the theor, that tic Administration of such 4
Government can resort to theit own Jul gmeut 81
public necessity. and act contrary othc suprem,
law. and th I good citizenship requr,s he peopl,
to acuaiesce in that iulgaicnt rhey " ho - ~
such y claim tor our rulers clsim tor them an en-
tirel, irresponsible power We afe required. io
examu!e TO believe that what are sale ssrhi