Daily State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1865-06-19
state Sovereignty VS.. Nationality.
Under this head the New York Tribune dis
courses as follows:


Under this head the New York Trbune dis
courses as follows:
"Henceforth, the United States constitute ma
ton. as France. or Russia, OF Great Britain, is a
nation We still have subordinate divisions and
distinctions. have other nations; but no part
is equal to the whole, or has power to DESTROY its
Wilderness. Webster and Hayne argued this
question out; Jackson and Calhoun would have
fought il out bad not the latter succumbed: and
now we have fought il out"
State sovereignty under the Constitution
that State sovereignty which the Democratic
party has ever maintained and defended--is not
opposed to nationality. 1t is opposed to central
zation out that is far different thing True
nationality in accordance with our
republican theory of government--deDends for
its very existence upon State sovereignty; and
when the latter is destroyed the former will be
sunk into centralized despotism, and the people
will be slaves.
The United States is not now, nor, while its
present form of Government exists. can it be a
nation cas- France. or Russia or Great Britain.
is nation" Ii State sovereignty be DESTROYED
the United States can be nation as France or
Russia, are nations. for then the National Gov
eminent would be despotic But under the Con
stitution of the United States. the sovereignty,
the vital governing force. is with the people. the
transact certain delegated duties But Russia is
a despotism, France is ruled by the bayonet and
highlands nationality is in the crown. How then
is the United States a nation like those coun
triesg 1t is not now, but il would be if the doc
trine of State Rights were destroyed That is
the danger for freemen to avoid.
w ebster and Hsyne argued this question
out" What question: Did Mr. Webster, the
great expounder of the Constitution, ever init
mate his acquescence in doctrine the effects
of which would be TO constitute the United
States nation, as France, or Russa or Great
Britain, is nstionf" Mr. Webster denied the
constitutional right of State to secede from the
Union. but as to adopting such menstrous her
esy as that set forth by the Tribune, be never
did, nor could. His learning as q lawyer, his
patriotism as citizen of a republic, forbid the
idea that Mr.. Webster could have entertained
such sentiments. He differed from the Demo
cratic party the measure of rights which
the General Government was entitled to under
the Constitution; but he never proclaimed the
doctrine that the States were mere sppendages to
the National Govern ment o., in other words
tha, the United States Is nation as France,
Russia. or Great Britain, is & nation" That is
Capitalization; and Capitalization IL despotism
as well in the United States as in France, Rus.
STA. or Great Britain.
The question about which Gen Jackson and
Mr.. Calhoun differed. is not that which the Tri-
bune presents. In that case Congress passed
law which Mr. Calhoun aid the State be repre-
sented thought unconstitutional: and the issue
was, whether South Carolina had a right 10 re-
pudiate that law, and prevent its enforcement
within her territory. But because South Caro-
lima and Mr.. Calhoun made q mistake in this
case. il does rot justify the insult to the memory
of Gen. Jackson of implying that he endorsed
any doctrine that would constitute the United
States a nation. as France. Russia. or Great
Britain is a nation" General Jackson was a
State Rights man. and Dot IN favor Of cenlralizs-
ton.
But We protest once for all against the stu
pidity or wlcketness of confounding the great
American, constitutional doctrine of State Rights
with that of secession. We are in favor Of the
former. against the lat,er.-Philadeiphia Age