Clarksville weekly chronicle. [volume] (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1865-1867, 1866-04-20
II our rcdersI Union IL a COMPACT aim.

FRIDAY, Ib".~-..-,~........20, 1866.
II our Federal Union IL compact, SIM
ply, then, II that compact should be violated
10y one Of Tie parties, ut any time, such vio-
lation would justify the other party in abap
dSnihg IT, This proposition all csc under
sand, and all will admit.
Again. the North did violate that compact
Of Union In refusing to return figitives to
the South, and to permit the South her rights
in the common Territories. This President
johnson declared In the most earnest man
ner in the Senate, prior To the 4th of March,
1861, In his speech on the invasion of the
South by the armed forces Of the North,
under John Brown, and In other speeches.
Indianapolis Herald.
The case is strongly prcsessed, notwith-
standing the writer neither afirms nor de-
mics the conclusions SO logically deduced
from his hypothesis. After giving proofs
that leading Northern men had affirmed the
doctrine of State rights In the broadest
sense, and that Northern States did violate
this compact, the editor adds:
"Now, whst do our loyal Republicans say
70 that7 Was not thst the doctrine on
which sse South acted7 Who raised the
heresy Of compact and sesession2 Who I"
It Is with this concluding paragraph that
we propose to deal. 1t contains two errors
of too grave q character to be passed un-
needed BY those who would vindicate the
character Of the South, as well - the truth
of history. But. in doing this, 1t must be
promised that the issue made, 10 Of no prac-
stcal value farther than Il bears upon the
past political status of the country, and in.
wolves the motives and actions Of the South.
Practical secession 10 an exploded dogma,
and was surrendered a. one Of the conditions
d peace and restoration; therefore any
comments upon it. as living idea prior to
the war, cannot be justly construed into
defense Of the doctrine at this date.
We have said that the paragraph contains
two errors. The first is, that the idea that
the Union was a compact, 10 heresy; and
the second, that this heresy wastaught the
South by the North. The word compact,
critically speaking, means no more nor less
than an agreement between two, or more,
competent parties 10 form union Of means
aud interests for accomplishing Of certain
specified object. The Union, then, was SIM
ply the result Of an agreement between GER
tain States to form common centre-a fed.
eral head, 10 be vested with certain specified
powers, bearing upon the general relations
between those States themselves, and for the
more efficient administration of foreign af-
fairs. These powers were cautiously and
clearly defiuea; and the grest obstacle en-.
counteref by the contracting parties, was
the apprehcnsio that their central agent
might absorb too much power and, in the
end, beesae the master rather than the ser
want Of the people.
IF them the theory, that the Union was a
compact is heresy, It originated. not with
the North nor with the South, but with the
convention that framed the Constitution and
fashioned the federal system. By that able
body, the Union was considered a voluntary
compact and, like all other compscts could
be voluntarily cancelled when either of the
contracting parties violated its stipulated
terms. When Edmond Randolph offered a
resolution to empower the general Govern
ment to coerce a seeding State, he did 1t
with view to test the sense of the Conven-
ton on the subject of the character of the
compact; and when the Convention unani-
mously voted down the resolution, It virtu-
ally declared the compact to be purely VOL
untsry. In farther confirmation of this
point, the fact is well known that, after the
required number of States had adopted the
Constitution, and the compact was perfected,
several Of The States refused, for time, TO
enter into the Union, and when they finally
consented to do so, It was with the express
reservation Of the right to withdraw when
ever the Union failed, as to them, to accom-
plish the objects for which 1t was created
That they were admitted, otxithstand ding
this reservation, affords ample proof that
Congress endorsed, by receiving them, the
justice Of the reservation, as well as the vol
untaSy nature Of the compact. IF the Union
be not the result of a voluntary agreement
between the States, who were the men, or
whsf the circumstances that forced them to