Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1868-02-28

I the people, who are above the States,
and whose government, ordained and
established by Them, is sovereign over
the States.
Patrick Henry who was an advocate
OF State Sovereignty and an opponent
OF our constitution, gave the following
instructive opinions concerning it in
his address before the Virginia Conven-
ton:
"That this is a consolidated govern
ment is demonstrably clear; and the
danger Of such a government Is, to my
mind striking. / have the highest ven
Grafton for those gentlemen (Who form
ed the constitutional but, sir, give me
leave to demand what right had they to
say We, the pe0pBsR' My political curl
OsltY, exclusive Of my anxious EOlici-
tude for the public welfare, leads me to
ask. who authorized them to say we,
the peopIes' instead Of we, the States2'
States are the characteristics and the
soul of me confederation. If the States
be not the agents Of this compact, it
must be one great consolidated nation
al governments Of the people of all the
States.H
But, suppose we consider this ques-
ton from the Democratic standpoint,
assuming that the Union is a com pact.
To make a contract or compact having
any legal Obligations, two things are
two contracting parties legally capable
of making contract. Second, There
must be something outside of and in
dependent of the contract which shall
give 1t sanction, that is which may pun
ish a violation, or compel a specific per
tOrmance OF It's terms This sanction
ing element is known as the law, and
not only exists before, but is independ-
ent OF the compact. The compact OF
contract does not make tie law, but Ger
tain acts of the parties under the law
become the contract,
Now, by virtue of what law existing
before and independent Of the com pact
of Union does it derive binding force
1t cannot be the law of nations, for that
applies only to independent powers,
and not the members of a confedera-
ton. Tt cannot be the Constitution, for
that, by confession, is the compact it
self legal obligation. ItcannoG be the
Ia " Of God, for that is binding only up
on the conscience.
Upon the theory that the Union is a
compact entered into by the States as
parties, it is impossible TO discover any
legal obligation resting upon the par
ties to adhere to it. This Union is
bound together only by a mere moral
obligation resting upon bodies which
have no conscience or else its existence
is contingent upon the observation Of
mere point Of honor. Such an Union is
a mere rope of sand.
For who is 20 enforce this obligation?
Not the general government, for that is
something growing out Of the com pact,
and not existing before or Independent
of it. Besides, 1t is assumed TO be the
creature of the parties who have dele
gated its powers, and reserve the right
to Judge, each for itself, as wei OF IN
fractions, as Of the mode and measure
Of redress. The general government
does not make the compact obligatory
IL ~
powers from the compact; while that
which enforces an ordinary compact
between parties is something whose
powers were already in being before the
compact was formed. In this case the
parties to the compact are assumed to
be sovereign, and the general govern
ment is as much the agent of one as OF
another; of one set as of another set.
1t is difficult to see, there tore, how one
one of the parties could show any bet
ter claim to the agency or the general
government in enforcing the compact
as they understood il than the balance
of the parties could make to the same
agency in enforcing their understand
ing. The special purposes which one
set might claim the general government
was esta ablished for might be very diff
ferent from those for Whichit was Ordain-
ed in the estimation of another Set
What is to determined which set shall
government shall enforced By the terms
Of the Kentucky ordinance the general
Faess1eut shall not be e5teisisiy5 or De
nal Judge OF It's powers, and aa there no
such judge, but each State judges for it.
self, the general government is a nulitY
and the Union is anarchy. A theory
more completely jUstifYing secession
and rebellion could not be devised.
The States caunot enforce the COM
pact. This would be for the parties to
well might he thatis damaged attempt
by his own authority to collect damages,
or he that is a partner attempt WitE
his own hands to lay hold upon his fell
low partners goods to indemnify him
self for real or imaginary loss.
If the Union is q compact what but
mere superiority of force is to prevent a
es? A party to an ordinary civil con I
tract may certainly = violate it and take
the consequences, for only in certain
cases can a specific performance be le- I
the same? For the sake of being re-
leased from an odious obligation man
may be wiling to sacrifice great deal. /
May not State alsO2 And if she
chooses to violate her obligations for
the sake of Independence, who is to in
demnify the adhering States for the
violated compacb2 Who shall Indem- !
Nifty us for the reasonable and destruc- /
tive work of rebellion? Or, as did Mr.. !
PendletOn in one speeches, we might
inquire,
"What force of arms can compel a /
State to refrain from doing that which
her State Government, supported by the /
sentiment of her people, is determined
to persist in doing 2"
And we might reasonably conclude, 1
as did Mr.. Pendleton, that
'fThe whole scheme of coercion is i'm |
N47s 70,
and spirit of the Constitution
But we understand the Constitution
differently. We interpret it to mean as
did the fathers who framed it-that this
government OF ours is a nation, not a
cOnfederacy of States. Mr.. Madison, in |
commenting on the subject, says in the
Federalist:
Suppose for a moment that the su-
premacy of the State Constitutions had
been left complete by a saving clause
in their favor. The world
would have seen for the first time a svs-
tenn of government founded on an IN
vasiOn Of the fundamental principles Of
all government it would have seen the /
authority of the whole society every
w here subordinate to the parts; it would
have seen a monster in which the head
was under the direction of members"
Alexander Hamilton, who was Per-
baps the foremost of all as a framer and
advocate of the Constitution, maintain
ed with equal vigor the supremacy and
consolidation of the Union. In the
course of one of his admirable ESSAYS
advocating its adoption, he says:
''The great and radical vice in the
Constitution of the existing cOnfedera-
ton is in the principle of legislating for
States, or governments in their cOllec-
tive capacities, and as distinguished
from the Individuals Of whom they con-
sist."
In another place Mr.. Hamilton says:
sit (the Federal government must
carry its agency to the persons Of The
citizenS; it must stand in need Of no in
termediate legislations; but must itself
be empowered to employ the arm of the
ordinary magistrate to execute its own
resolutions. The majesty of the nation
al authority must be manifested through
the medium of the courts of Justice
The government of the Union, like that
| of each State, must be able to address
| itself to the hopes and fears of individ-
uals, and attach to its support those
/ passions which have the strongest in
Z ha