Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-02-27

/ against the ConleuerAie othteSi 10
adherinr to the United states, or whei
she demands that he shall be declared Z
have forfeited high Office held by MN
and when such party claims by his aeu
that he is obeying the lawful govern
ment of the State, aud complying non
orablv with his obligations Al
a citizen from making known tha
il does not merely yield,
even it be bound to do so, compulsory
acqufescence in the decision of the ma
iority Of the people of the State but tha'
It's judicial opinion approves as righuui
if SO indeed il does, that which has been
done by the people; or from discharglng
the accused as innocent, ana holuibs
him not TO have forfeited his once, uh'
/ less reason. logic, and the authority ol
established facts compel II 70 hoIu hlin
/ guilty. and his Office forfeited. Kathel
/ than forbid this, sue would no longer
assert the right Of secession, but rely
/ on that of revolution and OF feoei-
/ lion, justified only by success. II
/ would be more noble ana more
| worthy of her, to seek rather TO hole
| her children to her cause BY reason arg AZ!
those sacred ties which bind every ciIS
zen 20 his country and make IL cTliis
! against nature to abandon Ael cause tne
more grievous, base and ineAcu7a9Isi ~
l the opinion of all agesi in proportion 20
| the greatness OF her need ana the ueptD
/ of her extremity than to alIempt 10
| compel his loyalty by force. Even tle
[ laws Of God. it has Teen well said, are
| not right. because they are the express
/ sion of His will; but they are the
mandates Of his will, because they
are right. Where the question IS OF
Justice or injustice, Of hfe or Geeth,
perhaus-certainly Of honor or lndeii9ie
[ dishonor, to so many citizens Ii Is not NJ
I that the court should merely register the
edicts Of the people; that it should not
declare the law Of right, and, before
condemning, judieialiy demonstrate lhe
rjgbtf,Ilpess OF that action, if II was
rightfIII. No freeman should, under 2
| free Government, be impeaChed OF trea-
sonable conduct, though the penalty be
! forfeiture Of Office or franchise without
judicial decision of the rightfulness ana
| Justice of the impeachmeb, and dis
seizin, if il Be right, and il II 0e not,
being wrong, beyond the reach OF IN
uuiry and adjudication 10y the court.
The inquiry, therefore, will not De
extra judicial. We cannot escape from
If if we would nor do we desire 10 es-
cape. It is most fit that the judicial rea-
son should viBdicate, il It can, the Jus-
lice and rectitude Of the State in the
most solemn action of her existence,
frsught with the most mOmentOus c0nse-
ouences. and for which her people are
attained as rebels, their property at
tan2pfed to be cenfiscated, their civil
rights annulled, their lives declared for
faitad, and the State itself pretended 10
have committed suicide.
Let US first inquire into the nature OF
the constitution, the parties who mace
it.. and the rights and relations under H.
of the States existing when It was made
and by which it was ratified.
on the one hand il has been constantly
maintained "That the people Of the
a. several States composing the United
% States. were united as parties to con-
90 s.irutional compact, to which the peo-
. 50 NJ q of each State acceded rs a separate
% sovereign community, each binding
[ 4" itself by its own particular ratification
/ So and that the union, of which that com
/ A." paet was the bond, was union between
/ " the States and of the States which rat
Titled the compact"
on the other hand, il has been as con-
stantly maintained, "That the. eonstltu'
| .! ton was not league, cOniedefacy Oh
/ 20 compact between the people OF the
/ 4" several States, in their sovereign capa'
I cities; but a government proper
( 60 founded on the adoption OF the people
Uaud creating direct relations between
| "Hself and individuals; that the one
/ unaoDle of all the United States entered
( " into this compact, and tue states were
/ q not parties to il as States but i wa
/ 50 tbc association Of aif the people, undel
! "a a constitution Of government.
Unon a contract Of any kind whatever
| IL is not conceivable that any questions
| Of greater moment could arise, than thes'
| tyo.-who are the actual parties to 1t
/ and what its nature If, indeed, in th'
| case of any ordinary civil contract, two
/ such questions existed and were mootet
/ between the parties from the beginning
/ ffere would in law have been n'
c,fab contract, and no contract, what
ever. as in reason and justice and
{ .act that there would have been none
/ for want of that eoncurring consent O
/ wills of the contracting parties, neces
s9r- to make a contract betweenthem pos
/ sibin. r. for example, number OF per
sons were formally 10 sign what wa
l meant as a contract for some sort OF con
rection in q particular business, but par
] Of Them. from the beginning, understood
! IL TO create a partnership, While III
Z others understood IL to create q corpora
ton. it is entirely certain that cour
of equity would hold that there neye
was any actual and consummated con
tract entered into between them.
The differences Of opinion and cOuvic
ti0n between the States, as to the partie
fo tbe constitution and the nature Of II
we're quite as radical. They existed il
{ mil force at the beginning, as compistel
p-onounced as afterwards, never fadlu
awav by lapse of time; and if the mai
. ter were viewed in its moral aspect,
? could not be denied that in the procure
rnept Of the adoption Of the constituuo
. Ty all the States, a fraud was commute
upon cne portion or the other.
The radical difference Of opinion coul
not fail to be felt and exert a continu.
i influence in legislation because th
extent Of the powers Of the geneI,
i I government, and the mode and rules 4
. construction of those portions OF I'll
! constitution which invested il wit
= royyers. could not but largely depen
{ iiDnn the nature OF the instrument an
! / fhat was much involved I'm the questio
q 1 Of who were the true parties to 1t, an
, Nv what concurrent wills it was msd
= The construction and consequences
o. every compact must depend upo
| the question, tChJ made ana a
] / the parties to it. To decide tn
s question in the given case was even
decide what was the proper nan
! for the system Of government uhd'
G | which the people OF the states liVe'
1 | what was citizenship OF the Jnl1'
+ 1ta.as. what was the paramount alle9
II ance Of the citizen Of q State, and VIII
n EouId be his paramount obligation
: $50 of conflict between his State al
. fhe general government; what, in SUE
, a csae. would treason be, where W
. LODGED the propTietoTship Of the pub
e Lands and territorial Dependencies hC
l. and for whose benefit these were hel
n what was the proper disposition of th'
n nroceeds, what the political rights Of {
Is States and their citizens in connect
,f with those Territories; and VIII
NJ the civil status and political rigl
10 of the people of such Territories; q
No finally. whether, the Union being of {
2 states. one or more of them had
'1 riobf Deaceably to Withdraw from IL,
IF accau1t of violation of the compact
ID other States or for other sufficient n
II cons. ITpon the solution OF this funC
i'm mental problem it even depended
81 whom the President was the agent a
he hv what considerations he ought to
w guided in the exercise Of the most !
be partant power entrusted TO him a
pm upon il, ss experience has proved, {
As nended the continuance of existence
he The Union, the fortunes and lives OF n
is lions, the prosperity OF ruin Of VIII
to States, ueaGe with its manifold bic
nj ipgs. or war with its aocumuia
10 horrors. Far better the constitution j
10 never been in appearance ratiiiedi sil
II ratified iu reality il could not be, Wit
as grave a question open, and the ratti
20. ton Of part Of the States being g
he uuder clear mistake, and being cfquii
Oh different instrument! Far better
al. Unlcn, which was no Union, since
s states differed as to the question
nj whom it was Union, had never b
he supposed to be formed The lsmenta
-ou and signal failure Of the eXperimen
not hut q Just consequence OF this 81
error and double-dealing and the les
aoi il teaches ought never again 10 be
Of gotten by mankind.
SO In seeking to ascertain the meaning
not any portion OF the constituuani ev
do one who desires to reach correct con
; a sions, must apply the same rules Of
les. struction as are applied by the court
re- Justice to other instruments. bor Il
,ot- rules are but the expression Of that WI
ary common reason and common sense
Y,To tate and common Justice requires. i
an are not arbitrary nor invented, but
'axr logitimate and natural means of att