Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1868-06-03
dEMPHES APPEAL
THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATES.


glance and Secession, an Essay on th'
Constitution and Government of tbs
United States"; by the Hon. William
! Hunter, Judge of the Criminal Court o
Memphis.
In preparing and presenting to the
public this work, Of forty-three pages
the author processes to have been influ.
enced "by desire to supply what has
long appeared to be a great public want
In the political literature Of the country,
an analysis OF the fatal heresies Of State
Sovereignty, State Allegiance and Sc
cession, upon legal and Constitutional
basis, which would present the subjecl
in form accessible to the mass OF tie
people"
However erroneous the assumptions
and arguments Of the author may be,
his brochure Is at least calmly and dis
passionately written and it is entitled
to respectful consideration at the hands
OF the critic, because it appeals to reason
and not much to passion and prejudice.
How little the author has studied the
subject on which he writes, 1t is not Ill
natured to say, appears from his preface,
In which he asserts that with the excep-
ton Of Mr.. Webster's speech on the
Foote Resolution, 5 speech of Robert ].
Walker, and a lecture delivered in Ohio,
" hothIng has appeared Of any value, cal
culsted to inform the public mind upon
the most important question to every
American citizen, the nature and char
doteT Of his 0Icn Government -
It is somewhat singular that one pre-
pairing himself to enIighten the people
on that subject, should have been igno-
rant OF the great debate between Mr..
Webster and Mr. Calhoun, upon their
antagonistic resolutions offered in the
Senate, as to the nature and character
Of the government, in which the whOls
subject was exhausted, and by which the
opinions of men were settled every
where. We may well doubt whether one
thus lily informed is likely to shed much
light on the subject ef which he treats,
and which, 3 brief examination will
show, he mistrests.
Il is pity that Judge Hunter should
have felt himself at liberty to say that
4" il is fact too patent to be disputed,
that among the Southern people, partic-
ularly that class which has been identi-
fed with slavery and the rebellion, there
Is not only no attachment for, but q de-
cided Rntipathy to, a republican form OF
government" What other form OF
government" then, do they prefer? Do
they wish a monarchieaI or oligsrchical
One2 The assertion thus broadly made
is too ridieulously prepOsterOus, to have
other effect on Southern reader than to
provoke q smile OF pity for the hallucina.
ton which could so blind and bewilder
one desiring 4" to supply great public
want" The people of the South are far
more devoted to the principles Of repub-
lican liberty than those of the North are;
and if separated from the North, the
Southern Republic would endure for cen
turies after the Northern States had been
consolidated into an Empire.
The author in question, after uttering
this nonsense, and adding some words 10
support of his assertion, and some Of de-
clsmstion as to slsve-tyrants, and the
the great battle Of slavery against the
nstion, commences his work.
He first quotes the definitions Of souer-
eigaty, from Webster, Bowler and Story;
and then enumerstes as the essential at
tributes Of sovereignty, the principal
powers exerciseabls by the General Gov
ernment, without which, he says, q |
State IL necessarily without sovereignty, |
that consisting In the possession and en-
joyment Of these attributes alone or, as
he says at page IS, that sovereignty, |
from It's very nature, cannot belong to
State which recognizes q superior, OF &C.
knowledges the authority of higher pow
er as the Supreme power Of the land.
Petitio pg'inoipii, or begging the ques.
tIon, is the commonest trick of dialec-
tics; but to be at ali successful, It must
be skilfully and not clumslly done. or
course, II it be admitted that the States
did not form and adopt the Constitution
and enter into the Union, but the people
Of az the States. as one people, imposed
the Constitution and Goyernmsnt on the
it be admitted that in thus
creating nation, the States accepted
created by the people, the other
of Judge Hunter become
easy OF demonstration.
But that is the very question at issue
n the Constitution is a compact between
the States, by which they do not create
Or accept superior, but agree with each
other to exercise certain powers Of sove-
reignty jointly, and not to exercise them
severally, exercising them jointly by
means Of agents selected by them or
their respective peoples, and by eorpo-
ration, the United States, in which the
States are stockholders, than the
States retained all their sovereignty, but
exercise its principal powers jointly.
The author then quotes portions Of the
Articles Of Confederation, :" between the
States of New Hampshire, Massachu-
sets Bay, etc." by which It was de-
elsred that the Confederacy" should
be styled "The United States Of Ameri-
ca, and this provision was made to
prevent any possible misunderstanding
as to the nature of the Confederation
and perpetual Union between the
States
Each State retains Its sovereignty,
freedom and independence and every
power, Jurisdiction and right which Is
not by this Confederation expressly del
egated to the United States ill Congress
1ssesabled." /"
The meaning Of this article is so per,
Ieetly plain, the meaning Of the articles
0f Confederation is 50 clear, that one Is
amazed to see 1t egregiously misrepre-
sented by any man who can read our
English language. The States united
and confederated together, by league