The Daily empire. (Dayton, Ohio) 1865-1867, 1866-07-17

by the enchantmcnt.
That unsound national pride 10 which the
term patriotism has Of fate been misap-
piled, Is In some danger Of swamping us.
We Americans, whose boast u Is, that our
| thoughts are free as air. are, In cOnse-
quence, prone 10 think loflily, and 10 act
| always on grand scale. There is, some
how, an insatiate desire to surpass every
body else IN whatever we undertake, SO
| that we are fast becoming enthusiasts like
the French. The spirit iswell enough, but,
just now, II lacks moderatlon-is by far too
ardent.
Accustomed to consider our country al
nation, as compared with foreign States,
the desire naturally follows, tO have Il sol
not In name merely but In fact. States, we
say, are, after all, only petty, Insignificant
organizations, whose consequence In rela
tiOn tO the General Government Is little
more than that Of counties to the State !;
that they are parsimonious and incapable
OF executing grand schemes, are apt 10 be
selfish and narrOw-minded Ia their policy.
and besides, that among sO many individ-
uals each possessing equal power ami voice,
MISUNDERSTANDING and iealOusies must In
evltably arise, fatal alike 10 kind feeling
and harmony Of design.
| To avoid these imaginary evils and 10
feed our morbid prideit Is proposed 60 ma
tionalize or Government, 30 centralize in
stead ofdistribniing our power, TO eOnsoll-
date distinct elements Into one, instead
Iaf retaining them separate and intact.
Ifhe eAafm ii charm there be, Is delnsiyc
lone, and within its yelvety foot are COM
cealed dangerous claws. 't
The bait offered is OF such nature IA 10
please our fancy and stimulate pride, but
d close investigation discovers that Il Is on
ly Q thin veil drawn over the hook of des-
| pOtigm. naa..
There is nothing new or rovel In the
doctrine, nor need u be accounted strange
1 that this point has been reached at date
10 comparatively early In our history, since,
lf we glance back for example we find the
ultm<te tendency In all governments has
been. first TO centrnlizatiOn and it Is to this
destination the Ndtiopdiisefs are lust now
leading us. In the abstract we very prop
IeTly call ourselves nation, and do cherish
a fotveut love for the country considered In
la national sense, or as whole, but we do
not propose TO forget how that whole was
formed, and Is, therefore, at present consti-
tuted, since we hold that no change effect
ing fundamental principles has yet been
made. We are aware that those who favor
naturalization are not destitute Of strong
points and incontrovertible arguments, pro-
vided we consent to hold that the freedom
and Importance Of the individual are wor-
THY only secondary consideration. We
are free TO acknowledge that a system of
GENERALIZATION has its peculiar advantages
IN the oneness aud regularity of its move
ments and In the Iirmness and strength
which ever pertain to consolidation, but
we question whether II operates always i'm
partially and uniformly as regards the in
ldiyidua. We can reverence the absolute
government which the Almighty has es-
tabllslled IN Elysium, we can admire the
centralized power which regulates worlds
wandering in the immensity of spaee, we
can even tolerate the rule Of wise prince
over illitoratc aud barbarous men, hut II
does not necessarily follow, that we In turn
should yield 10 the will of one, or of a few
Mol Liberty, entire, unquestioned, Is the
birthright, the inheritance of the Ameri-
can citizen. The soldiers Of the revolution
fought, not for a country nor yet for the
Union, but for liberty, for personal free
dom. They gained it and II is, by right
ours.
But IL may be urged that a change was
effected at the time of the formation OF the
Constitution. To prove whether or not this
be 80, II will be well to glance briefly at the
Iorigin of our Government, aud Judge from
that, what object there was TO be attained
in forming IT, and what was the original
intention of the trainers of the Constitu-
tion.
We find that certain adjacent colonies
had untedly raised the standard of rebel
lion, had with wonderful unanimity prose-
cuted their purpose to q successful issue,
and had been recognized, severally, as free
and sovereign States, by the power which
formerly had claimed Jurisdiction over
them; that having been sufferers In a COM
mon cause, there existed among them "A
common sympathy, coupled with desire
10 renew and strengthen the bond which
had held them together throughout long
and grievOus war; finally, that In the fur
| therance of this object, q convention OF the
States was called, "ln order to form more
perfect union, establish justice, insure do
nestle tranquility, provide for the common
defense, promote the general welfare, aud
secure the blessings of liberty"
Aud now we are TO Notwithstanding to
sOme-the strange anomaly of certain en-
tire, distinct aud independent corporations
creating common corporation In which
they are TO lose their identity, investing it
with all the powers and privileges former
ly pertaining 10 them individually, ofwhich
they voluntarily deprive themselves. .,l
Bntis 10 reasOnhble 70 suppose, nay, Is it at
| all presliuIable, that States which had but
just secured their freedom, were Just ex-
Iulting in their disinthrallmentfrom an odi-
Gus oppression would forthwith create
neaO power TO which they must be com
pletely subservicnt at whose ned and beck
they must tremble and obeyp On the con-
trary, Is IL not much more logical and ra-
tiOnal to infer, both from the facts, and
| from the motives which usually influence
men and corporate bodies through them,
that the States were exceedingly Jealous of
Itlleir liberty, that In proportion 20 the fear
flil price 1t had cost them they priced It
and that 1t was too precious a thing TO be
lbartered away for an empty name; that
they created the Union as u sacred deposit
ltoFy OF the liberties of all, and the general
government, as II were, an agent, 10 act for
them In their corporate capacity and as
common and supreme arbiter in all matters
of internal dispute; that the powers and
privileges granted 10 this agent, but with
certain limitations and restrictions, were
such only as must be exercised In the per-
iformance of specifically assigned duties,
all other rights being expressly reserved 10
the States Thus IL was that each State re-
Itaining the sovereignty and independence
preserved the liberty Of its citizens whose
lrightful protector II Is by nature H.
/ From the time Of the adoption OF the Con-
stitution there have been recognized, sub
Istantially, two great political parties, which
have held doctrines differing essentially
Il upon certain constructions of that instrn-
ment the one, IN the main, advocating a
rigid restriction of power from the General
IGovernment TO grants explicitly made the
other, iavoring more liberal interpreta-
tiOn,, and Indirectly, an approach 10 con-