The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1867-10-05

1
| which peace was rudely disturbed in 1856
and broken without remorse when rebellion
! planted itself upon the first secession Sord1
nance and trained its guns upon Sumter.
This anti-national party, grasping IN Its
agony at every straw for relief, resorts to the
puerile method of attempting to found an ar
gument on a play upon word. we are
gravely told that if a State be out OF the
Union, then it is rightfully out; that 1t never
got out unless secession took 1t out, ana II
secession really did take it out, why then Sc
cession was valid act, and then the war
waged upon these seeded States was conse-
quently tyrannical and unjust. This is the
inevitable dilemma. But prick 1t With Il
pin and it collapses at once.
: Its fallacy consists in employing the word
Estate" in two different Specifications. In
fact the different well defused and distinct
ideas, which this single term serves to con-
vey, gives rise to no little of the confused
thought which exists in the public mind
about the relation of the rebel States to the
general government. Had we a different
word for each different idea, the whole mat
ter would stand in u much clearer light. As
it is, we are compelled to use the word
"Staten to express variety OF different
meanings.
For instance, when we say State is in the
Union, we mean one thing by the word
State;n when we say State is out OF the
Union, we understand another, and quite
different thing, by the same word.
In the first sense, we are to understand the
word State" in q geographical or terrific
rial sense; that is, as conveying the ldea Oh
certain district of country marked out by
metes and bounds. Thus we say, we live IN
the State of North Carolina. In this sense
of the word, North Carolina is as completely
in the Union and under the control OF its
laws as Montana territory, the District OF
Columbia or the State of New York. :. :,
In the second case, the word conveys an
idea totally different from this. In this
connection the term estate" has technical
meaning. We mean constitutional State;
an organized form of local government,
having certain will defined relations TO a
central government, such as sending repre-
sentatives to the Congress and requiring all
the officers to recognize the supremacy of
the general government by taking an oath
to support its constitution. We say State
is in the Union, when all these attributes or
qualities are in existence; when all the re-
lations of the State to the general govern
ment ale undisturbed and unbroken. But
suppose State chooses to ScOrn these rela-
tions and break away from the orbit il
which it had been moving in beautiful harmo-
nv; what then becomes of the State? There
is not single State officer that can be re-
cognized by the general government, be-
cause not one of them has ever taken the
oath prescribed by the constitution of the
United States. There is then no State ma
chinery at ALL There exists no vestige of
constitutional organization. The State has
abdicated. The body polite is dead, and
lifn oon only no hrna hp6 into If from with.
out. In this sense North Carolina is out of
the Union The Congress has SO declared,
and its legislation has all been founded upon
this hypothesis, What right, then, has been
trampled upon? What precept of the con-
stitution has been violated! And finally,
whence proceeds this rebellious cry against
sion, prejudice and the lust for power?
All gentlemen, those who led off in re-.
bellion did not think that the States would
lose none of their constitutional rights, in
case they were defeated in their desperate
enterprise. They knew well that, the great
battle was to be fought over and above the
constitution that the very nature of that
instrument was such that it could by no
possibility provide for any such contingent
cy. The battle was fought upon the high
ground that the safety of the people is the
supreme law These leaders were well
aware that, in the death grapple of war, all
had been staked They knew what were
the laws and usages Of war when they APP
pealed to the dread arbitrament ofthe sword.
They well understood that they threw away
every right and privilege, which they enjoy
ed under the constitution, when they put
that constitution under their feet and trust
ed to their strong right arms. What were
+ no la do tf,f 1,a Ia
alarm sounded upon all occasions was what
would be the fearful and inevitable result of
subjugation, and the people were melted and
maddened to fight it out to the bitter end.
The rebel chiefs knew that if they succeeded,
independence and sovereignty was before
them; that if they failed, they were at the
mercy of the conqueror. In spite of the re-
the entreaties, the prayers of
the friends of the Union, and with a full
knowledge Of the responsibilities and conse-
quences of their action, they determined
upon their course. They staked life and
death upon the issue; they staked, and thank
God they lost al
The second proposition is: The poaoer to
prescribe the terms Of reconstruction is Uested
in the Congress.
take it that it is not necessary to argue
before this audience that this power is not
vested In the President He is the arm of
the government; he merely executes the will
of the nation. ''' % -. 'I
The argument which denies to Congress
the power to prescribe these terms is the
argument which establishes secession
But if we scout secession and hold that these
States were not sovereign even while in the
Union as constitutional States, much less
can they be sovereign now, that they havere-
belled and have been conquered. Let us exam
inc little further into the evidence, which
goes to show the supremacy of the general
government over the constitutional States.
The letter of General Washington to Con-
gress, while President of the Convention,
which framed the present Federal Constitu-
lion, expressing the sense of that body, sets |
forth in unmistakabe language that the |
great object, which that body had kept con-
stantly before them was the consolidation of |
the Union. The preamble itself declares it
to be the will of the people. In 1888, Con-
gress passed a resolution declaring that |
Constitution for the people of the United
States had been duly ratified. Patrick
Henry argued against the adoption of the
constitution in the Virginia Convention on I'd
'he ground that it consolidated the govern
nent. George Mason argued upon the same
hypothesis. Thus taught Mr.. Madison, Ed
1Q0e Gerry of Massachusetts M,