Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1867-10-01
[For the Spectator.
q Sovereignty of the People.
ASPEN HILL, September /;

sovereignty VI Cue 0opAo'
ASPEN HILL, September Is.
The views held by the leading politicians Of
the present day as representatives, OF the domi-
nant radical party in reference to the true I'M
port Of the phrase the sovereignty OF the people,
are in manifest contradiction of all sound views
as to the real nature of a representative govern
ment. General Grant laid himself open to Sc
we're criticism when he advanced the opinion,
that the will of the people constituted the law
of the land. If the merest tyro in politics with
only partial knowledge of the history OF the
formation of our government, and the efforts OF
its founders to introduce checks and balances
for the protection of minorities, and to guard
against the temporary passions OF the people In
adopting a written constitution as the supreme
law of the land, had expressed SO absurd an
opinion, he would have been pronounced an UNI
mitigated fool But It must be remembered,
that General Grant has mere mushroom ex-
istence as politician and seeing that the acts
of the radical party were in conformity with his
doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, and
not having the acumen to apprehend the stu
pidity of the principle when set forth in plain
proposition, fell into kind of political bog of
Allen, that the mere astute politicians of the
radical school would have walked around
That the will of the people, as understood to be
inherent In dominant majority, should be re-
rights of a community should be regarded, is a
monstrous dogma that deserves condemnation
at the hands of every sensible man as most
preposterous and dangerous political maxim
All governments and all laws that are framed
for the good of men must be amenable to the
eternal principles of justice, and must derive
their binding force from a conformity to the
moral code. We do not mean to affirm that
for every inequality, incident to all forms of
fall
entitled to redress their grievances by an at
tempt at revolution, but simply that the decis
ions of majority cannot make wrong right, nor
right wrong.
There is no more reason why the acts of a
ruling majority should have In them more of
justice or superior moral claims per Sc, binding
the citizens of State to conformity than the
acts Of strong man who makes use of power
simply to impose upon his weakly neighbour
There is this difference, however, that in the
latter case there is an appellate tribunal in the
law, whilst in the former the only appeal, the
appeal to arms, is in the nature of the case al
most ever inexpedient And, therein lies the
enormity Of the proposition that the majority,
as it were JJure dtUano is endowed with unlimit-
ed power; whereas, in sober reality, it is the
most unsafe and most unjust principle ever pro-
mulgated upon which to found the institutions
of free people. If the decisions of the major
ity were always right if ianaticism did not at
times rule the hour, we might admit the doc
| trine that might makes right, and that there is
no protection for minorities against majorities,
because, under all circumstances, the rights of
minorities would be secured 500
But, if our promises are false, if the decisions
of the majority are often wrong if the majority
of the citizens are sometimes borne away by the
tides of fanaticism, there must Of necessity be
some magma charta for the protection of the
rights of the sohole people against the encroach-
ments Of arbitrary power, whether it acts thro'
the will of despot or the will of an irresponsi-
BILE majority. If we admit the political princi-
pie that power makes right, then we must also
admit the logical consequence, that the majority
can do no wrong. But, if the majority can do
no wrong, then, under no possible contingent
cies, has any portion of the people, constituting
minority ever SO large, the right to oppose the
exercise of the most arbitrary powers.
Thus, instead of the absolute power of one
individual, We should recognize the validity of
hydra headed despotism of portion of the
people usually constituting a party, Influenced
by party animosities and prejudices, and i'm
PEELED by the basest motives to preserve by Ille-
Ultimate means It's ascendancy. The sovereign,
who has no higher position to attain, and who
| feels himself to be the representative man of
the whole nation, will, at least, have no motives
| impellng him to support measures antagonlstic
| to the welfare of any large class of his subjects.
The worst of all tyrannles, is the tyranny of a
majority, and the most stupid and most dan
gerous theory of government is that which as
serts its unlimited power.
There is prevalent error, that the right to
the exercise of power, politically speaking, is
inherent in the mere existence Of the power,
and is not to be tried by the code of morals ap-
plcable in all other relations of man to man.
1t is an absurd doctrine, and we are confident
| that no rejecting man, governed by the plainest
dictates of common sense, will ever admit it in
to his political creed Those who do, are found
in the rank of dishonest politicians who fatter
the multitude by boasting of its plenitude of
power for the sake of popularity and political
preferment. No wonder that Judge Grimke,
in his very able work on the Mature and Ten
dency of free Institutions" pronounced the
maxim to be terrible to humanity and destruc
tive Of the very interests which free govern
ments are designed to protect. K.