The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1868-02-20

he answers himself:
at length, but l will say this, that from
the beginning of the war up to the presen
time every message Of the president. ever,
proclamation, every state paper. and ever,
act of congress has proceeded upon th'
hypothesis that no state could seced'
from the Union that once in the unior
always in the union. Mr.. Lincoln in ev
cry ET-laFs7inn wen. on the principle
that xnsurrection, rebellion
aga .k.sttution and laws of the
Unit4 as, not o rebellion of states
but rebellion Of individuals, the people
of the several southern states, and every
man who went into it was personally and
Individually responsible for his acts and
could not shield himself under the action
or authority of his state. He went on the
principle that every ordinance of seces
sion, every act of the legislatures of the
rebel states in that direction was nullity
unconstitutional, and void having 10 lie.
gal force or effect whatever. and that these
states were, according to law. 10 the union
| their standing could not be effected by the
action of the people that the people oI
these states were personally responsible
for their n1uct. just as 4 man is respon-
| sble who violates the statute in regard to
the commission of murder, and to be
treated as criminals just as the authori-
ties thought proper that the people Of a
state can forfeit their rights, but that so
far as their action is concerned, in a legal
point of view, they had no power 20 affect
the condition Of the state in the union.
Every proclamation and every act of con-
gress have proceeded upon this hypothe
SIS"
Mr.. JOHNSON. What is the date of
the speech from which the senator reads !?
Mr.. HENDRICKS. The 29th day of
September. 1865. He then goes on to
say that Mr. Buchanan had held the op-
posite doctrine, and that the rebellion was
rebellion of states, and that the states as
such could not be subjugated. Then he
goes on to say:
"This was our answer to Mr.. Buchanan.
Upon this hypothesis we have just put
down the rebellion. But it is now proposed
BIZ some that we shall practically admit
that the southern states did secede; that
the work of secession was perfect, was ac
compliShed that the states are but Of the
union, that government de facto was es-
tabiished, and that We now hold these
states as conquered provinces. just as we
should hold Canada if we were to invade it
aud take possession of it,"
He closes upon this point BY using this
enipl i: language:
THAT ,s what this doctrine leads to-.
II leads to thousand other evils and per-
nicious things never contemplated in the
nature of our government"
Upon this subject will read from the
debates in this body four years ago and be-
fore the close of the war the argument of
the senator who now presides over this
body, who is now the second officer of the
government. That debate was before this
new idea was thought of, that under the
guarantee clause OF the constitution con-
gress could do in regard to the southern
states, whatever it chose to do-a doctrine
all-absorbing anu as dangerous as the
most despotic sentiment that governs any
country in the world. Pending the de-
bate on what was known as the Winter
Davis bill, Mr.. Wade used the following
language:
sit has been contcnded in the house of
representatives, it has been con;ended w.
on this floor, that the states may lose their
organizations, and their rights as states,
may lose their corporate capacity by rebel
lion. 1 utterly deny that doctrine. L
hold that once a state of this union always
state that you cannot by wrong and VII
olence displace the rights of nybody or
dlsorganize the state. 1t would be a most
hazardous principle to assert that. No,
sir the trainers of your constitution in
tended no such thing. Ihirty-eightA
Congress, p. 1850.
Aud how, gentlemen, with this princi-
pie of the constitution staring them in the
face, can fancy that states can lose Their
rights because more OIL less of the people
have gone off into rebellion is marvellous
to me.
Four years ago that senator, then hold
ing high position in this body, holding
high position in the republican party of
the United States, declared that state
could not lose its organization. that once a
state always state, and state under its
organization. Now, however, to maintain
the policy that has been adopted, you de
clare these states to be without govern
ments that in some way it resulted that
the state governments ceased to exist.
Now, Mr. president, l wish briefly to
consider the clause of the constitution,
which has been referred to so frequently.
making it the duty Of the government OF
the United States to guarantee to every
state in this union a republican form of
government. / think this is the right
construction it is an obligation and du-
ty imposed upon the government, and |
agree with my colleague when he says
that the Legislative department is not the
government; the executive department is
not separately the government; nor is the
judiciary the government; but the whole
taken together, in the proper exercise of
the powers conferred by the constitution
makes the government Of the states,
When duty is imposed upon the goven-
ment of the United States that duty must
be discharged by the appropriate depart
ment Of the government. If the act
which must be done in the discharge of a
duty imposed by the constitution is ju-
dicial act, then the duty is upon the ju-
dietary. If 1T be a legislative act the du-
a. Il Il I