Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1867-11-07

hhN hO |" IL tue tOllOu Dldlth tCN-
slider the value of the Union debata BILE
we maintain their perfect right to dis
cuss it. Nay, we hold, with J Jefferson,
TO the inalienable right of communi.
ties to alter or abolish forms of gov.
ernment that have become oppressive
or injurious; and, if the cotton States
shall decide that they can do better
out of the Union than in it, we insist
on letting them go in peace. The
right to secede may be a revolution
airy one, but it exists nevertheless I;
and we do not see how one party can
have a right TO do what another party
hasa right TO prevent. We must ever
resist the asserted right of any State
TO remain in the Union and nullify or
defy the laws thereof; to withdraw
from the Union is quite another mat
ter. And whenever a considerable
section of our Union shall deliberately
resolve to 60 out, we shall resist all
coercive measures designed to keep
them in. We hope never TO live in a
Republic whereof one section is pinned
TO the residue by bayonets."
This language, from a gentleman of
your acknowledged talents and infu-
ence, had a powerful effect upon the
people of Georgia. When / warned
them against the folly and danger Of
secession, was denounced asuntrue to
my section, was cited to your senti-
ments as thus expressed, and told that
you were sounder than | was upon the
mighty issue which then agitatcd the
public mind. To the extent of the
influence of such utterances from you,
(and it was very wide the people of
Georgia were induced to believe there
would be no attempt at coercion, and
if there should be, that you would
never give your influence in its favor
Now, put ii to your candor, if you
had been a Georgian, entertaining the
opinions which you and / did as to
the right of secession and the absence
of any right to coerce a seeding
State-though deprecating the expe-
diency-would you not, like me, have
linked your fortunes with the destiny
of your Stateg But we both now live
ain Republic whereof one section is
pinned TO the residue py bayonets,
and have lived to be reproached by
you for acting upon principles which
you promulgated.
1t is argued by many that the effect
of the attempt TO secede was extinc-
ton of the several governments of the
seeding States-a sort of political
suicide and that the defeat Of it by
the Federal Government merely pre-
served the territorial integrity of the
United States, without vivifying them.
To my mind, this is a most absurd
proposition. The States of this Union,
by virtue Of the sovereignty of their
people, are self-constituted political
organizations. They derived their
existence from no higher power than
themselves. They are unlike corpo-
rations which are created by the su-
preme power, and may, in various
ways, forfeit their franchises. In
other words, they are incapable OF
political suicide-incapable Of forfeit
ing their rights of self-government.
The people may voluntarily change
the form of their organization. They
might disband il altogether. But
does even such a radical change as
this deprive the people Of the sover-
eign right TO reorganize in their own
way Does il confer authority upon
any other power under the sun to
take them in hand and force a new
government upon them without their
consentl i challenge the production
of a single respectable authority,
ancient or modern, who has ever
written upon political or international
law, in support of such a doctrine.
But admit, for the sake of argument,
that these states, by secession, did
commit an act of forfeiture TO whom
did they Forfeit To whom did their
right of selfgovernment secure or
revertg Will it be pretended that it
was TO the remaining States, or the
Federal Government What is the
Government of the United States 7
Is it not the creature of the States Z
Was not its organization subsequent
to that of the several original Statesy 7
Is it not a Government of limited
powers, defined in the Constitution Z
How, then, could it succeed TO the
rights of the several seeding States :
Who ever heard of the creator forfeit
ing to the creature, or the principal
to his agenti Where is the word or
letter in the Constitution that even
remotely squints at such a doctrine !
Or suppose it we're in the Constitu-
ton, would il not be incumbent on
Congress, in reconstructing these
States, 10 proceed according TO the
Constitution. and on the great princi-
pies which underlie the frame. work
of our political system Would they
not be bound TO preserve the privi-
lege of the writ of hdbcds corpus, the
right of trial by jury, and recognize
the sacredness of property, life, and
liberty Can they substitute for these
military supremacy Dare they ig-
more the sovereignty Of the people OF
these States, and the fundamental
idea that all governments derive their
Just powers from the consent Of the
governedg Do you find any authori-
ty in the Constitution for placing
these States under military governors,
and adopting such machinery for reor-
ganization as subordinates the intclli-
gent and virtuous TO the ignorant aud
dcpravedg As well place the domin-
ion over eight millions of white peo-
pie in the hands OF four millions OF
neorOcs