The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1868-09-16
For the Standard.

Is the present State Government OF North
Carolina legal government ?..And II
so,r how may it be Altered a@lH y
These questions which areof the greatest i'm
portance to the peace and happiness OF the peo-
pie, If not to the very existence OF the govern
ment-are being discussed BY the press and pol
iticans of the country, and in our opinion great
ly misunderstood. And believing this, we hope
will be sufficient apology for this communica-
ton, in which we propose briefly to discuss these
| questions, And in order that the truth OF these
propositions may be determined, we propose to
+ examine them by the lamp Of experience, as far
as we can, and to let history as well as reason,
be the Judge. .tf
Then it IS commended by the opponents of the
present State government, that 1t is Illegal and
void, for the reason that is founded upon the re-
construction acts of Congress, which are them
selves unconstitutional and void. And that the
thing created cannot be greater than The thing
creating it.
And we confess that this argument is plausi.
BILE, and to most minds convincing. Because u
can hardly be contended that the legislation of
Congress known us the reconstruction acts of
Congress, are themselves constitutional. Ger
tainly it will not be contended by us that they
are, for in fact We do not believe them to be con-
stitutional. Neither can the truth of the other
branch of the proposition be denied-that is,
that the creature cannot be greater than the cre-
ator. Yet it does not follow that because these
acts of Congress are unconstitutional, that the
Constitution of the States are unconstitutional
and void. That the tallacy of this argument is
in the fact, that the Constitution of North Caro-
lima is not the creature of these acts of Congress-
but of the people themselves. .r. .,....-
That according to the theory of our govern
ment, the people are the sovereign power of the
State, and whatever government they adopts
legal and rightful government, provided it he not
inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitu-
ton of the United States, and be accepted by
Congress But we set out by saying that we were
willing to examine these questions by the lamp
OF experience, and that reason should be thejudge
Then let us examine before we 60 further and see
if this opinion is sustained by precedent. We
find that Charles the II, was restored to the
throne of England by q Parliament, assembled
under the usnrpations OF Cromwell. And yet the
legal right OF this monarch to the throne OF Eng
land was never doubted. But to come nearer
home, the question might be asked, what legal
constitutional authority had our revolutionary
ancestors for framing and adopting our Constitu-
tion of 1776. We know of none, and yet it can
not be commended that the government then erect
ed, was unconstitutional and void. Neither can
it be contended that said Constitution derived
any legal validity from any government or power
than the sovereign people OF the State. 4s .a
But to come still nearer to our present situa-
ton, it cannot be contended that President John
son had any more constitutional authority in
1865 Tor his plan of reconstruction than Congress
had for the acts they passed upon this subject.
Yet 1t formed basis for the action OF the people
which they accepted. That under the recon
struction policy of the President, the people as
sembled their Convention, amended the Consti-.
tuition, provided for .-e election and Inaugural
ton OF new State government, which was after
wards inaugurated, and, in orr opinion, would
have been an entire success, had her Senators
and Representatives been admitted to their seats
in Congress I'D T..
admit to seats her representatives; declared that
these governments were provisional only; placed
them under military supervision, and provided
by her acts for other governments in their stead.
And these governments, provided for by these
acts OF Congress, have now been organized and
inaugurated without opposition, and her Sena-
tors and Representatives have been admitted to
their seats in Congress, and their officers are in
! the daily discharge of the functions of State
government; and the question now is. is it a
legal, or an Illegal and void government?
And we are of the opinion that the historical
precedents referred to justify us in saying that
it is a legal and rightful government.
That, although we do not claim that the acts of
Congress were constitutional, yet, like the pro-
clamation of President johnson III 1865, they
formed basis for the the action o! the people;
and that when they had acted-no matter what
influenced them to do so-the government which
they framed being acceptable to themselves and
to Congress, and not inconsistent with the pro-
visions of the Constitution of the United States,
is like the government erected by Cromwell's
Parliament, and that of our own dear fathers erect
ed at Halifax in l716, is both legal and rightiul
government.
We do not contend but what the reconstruc-
ton acts of Congress are unconstitutional We
also admit that their tendency was revolutionary
and that the formation of t9e present State gov
ernment OF North Carolina was, to. a certain ex-
tent, irregular and without legal authority. Yet,
is not this the in the formation of almost ali
! new governments, especially aftera revolution or
civil war, which has dethroned the regular, con-
stituted legal authority? l,f-. r- .T
But because the present government of North
Carolina was established without regular legal
constitutional authority, any good reason why
we should destroy it, and erect another without
legal constitutional authority Suppose the pres.
ent government of North Carolina were to-day
declared to be Illegal and void on the ground
that the acts of Congress are unconstitutional
Would we not be in state of anarchy,-without
government and without any authority to form
and establish one. Had you thought of this {?
For it must certainly be true that if Congress
had no constitutional authority in 1867 to pass
reconstruction acts, she would have none in
1868 or go. If Congress has not the power the
President has not The regular and legal legisla-
ture of Vance has long since expired by the
provisions of the legal Constitution of North
Carolina And the people of North Carolina are
withouta government and according to the wis
dom of those who contend that the present
government is Illegal and void, they have no
remedy. This will not do-the people them
is legally right, whether it was wise and polite
or not. hi ..t ... al .s t.-fl
But before we leave this subject we wish to
examine special objection to the legality of this
government which carries great weight with the
the people. That is this, under the Constitution
of North Carolina, in force at the time the re-
construction acts of Congress were passed, ne
groes were not allowed to vote, but according
to the provisions of said act they were allowed
the right of suffrage. Aud it is commended that
tho w Constitution adn tod Inv ba;r ofa
and is, therefore, illegal and void We admit
there is force in this reasoning and as it is le-
gal objection, we are willing that legal history
that is legal procedure-may decide whether it
is correct or not The State of Rhode Island
continued to live under the government granted
her by Charles the II until 1912. According to
the provisions of that government no one but
freeholders were allowed the right OF suffrage.
This, as the State advanced in commerce and in
telligence, produced great dissatisfaction among
the people, who, in 1871, demanded of the Leg
islature the call OF convention for the purpose
ofreforming the government in this respect but
this request of the people was refused by the
Legislature, when the people took the matter in
their own hands, called convention, amend
ed their Constitution, giving suffrage to
all persons twenty-one years OF age, and
submitted this Constitution to the people for
their ratification, sc. This Constitution was
thus ratified by large majority of the then vo-
| tiers of the State. And Mr.. Thos. Dorr the Gov
erner elected, under the new Constitution, pre-
| sented it to the old Government with demand
| of the property of the State. This demand was
| resisted, and conflict of arms ensued, in which
! the old Government was successful. And out of
the result of this conflict Of arms grew the cele-
| brated case of Luther Vs. Borden, z Howard. page
4 l. On this trial it was commended that the new
I Government was Illegal for various reasons al
] legged, and ably argued by counsel Among
| which was this that under the old Government
| none were allowed to vote but freeholders, and
that under the new, all persons under the age of
| twenty-one years old, &c, were allowed to vote.
| And that the new Constitution was adopted by