Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-06-01
srArE-RIGHrs AID srArE-sOvEn-

sFATE-RIGH HTS And sTATE-sOVER-
ZIG Try.
Nothing can any longer astOnish US,
or we should be somewhat amazed to
learn ths~the Radical Supreme Court OF
Missouri had planted itself squarely on
the doctrine OF State Sovereignty, which
all the Radical Presses have been scout
ing at fofS wo years, as exploded, dead,
rotten and buried out of sight, never to
be resuscitated. We may at least COM
pliment the Court on its nerve and moral
courage i'm asserting a doctrine pregnant
with consequences 50 grave, and stamp
ing as Infamous so much that has been
done by Congress. We copy from the
st. Louis Republican
The supreme court of Missouri, in the
Blair-Ridgley opinion, has assumed a
strong position as the defender OF state
sovereignty, asserting with uumistakable
sincerity that the sovereignty of the
United States ig limited and derived,
while that of the states IS original and
inherent, and limited only by the few
powers which they surrendered to the
United States. They remind US of the
tenth amendment to the constitution of
the United States, which provides that
q the powers not delegated 10 the United
States by the constitution, nor prohibited
by it to the states, are reserved TO the
states respectively, or 20 tue people"
After quoting this historical and eOnsti-
tutional evidence that the United States
government is the creature Of the people
Of the different states, possessing not a
power or attribute Of sovereignty, greater
or less, which the people of the states
did not confer upon il, our radical Judges
proceed to say
"The states, when they entered the
union, retaining all their original POlUer
and sovereignty, except such as was X
pressly surrendered to the general gov
eminent, or they were expressly prohib-
tied from exercising. Subject to these
eXsRSts@, they are Independent com
nl0lIdOeall4s, and the exclusive Judges of
what is Just and proper for their own
safety, welfare and happiness
As the powers conferred by the people
Of the states upon the United States are
very few in number, it is manifest that
the " sovereignty" of the United States
is limited in range compared with the
sovereignty of the different states. The
are in fact, as our own radical
Judges assert, possessed of original
1Jot0er and soUereigntN," complete and
unlimited, except so far as they be-
slowed certain powers upon the
United States. Our orthodox judges
assure rs that they are independent
0GmnGnigsdlths,' with the few e1cep-
tinns named, and to make sure that they
shall not be misunderstood, these i'm
maculate and unsupported radical gen.
tlemen return again 70 the inherent
=" sovereignty y Of the states, reinforcing
themselves by a fresh draught at the
fountain of history. They tell us that
% Prior to the adoption of the federal
constitution, the respective states pos
sessed unlimited and unrestricted sOpe-
and ret4inedfBe same eUer after
Iuard excerpts SO far as they granted certain /
powers to the general government, or
prohibited themselves from doing car
fain acts. Every STATE reserved to
the exclusive right of regulating
its own internal government and police. u
And still sgain, these gentlemen,
political opinions are radically
orthodox, impress upon the people ia
their exposition of fundamental law,
that I" the state is not to be presumed in
any grant TO part with any Of the pOlOer
Inherent in it for the protection and pro-
OF the common welfare" except
20 far as certain powers are Hsapnesssq
JoRuededn by the states TO the United
states. We are happy TO chronicle these
proofs, that in the estimation Of orthe-
iox high priests Of the radical faith, it il
not Z" rebellion" - assert the sovereignty
md Independence Of the several states.
Z