The native Virginian. [volume] (Orange Court House, Va.) 1867-187?, 1869-08-06

oi"O SohtC VI thSiu expressly reserves
OF ii; aud that it was acknowledged b,
70 the trainers of the Constitution, and hal
Il been recognized by the highest authori
ties down to 1860.
That secession was legally competen
to the Southern States, and was moral
r. ly justified by the conduct of thei
Northern confederates.
The Declaration of Independence wa.
joint act; but an act for which the au
thorlty OF each colony was sought ant
received by it's delegates to Congres SIS
and which was done by them in it,
name and byit authority. The Dec.
laratfon pronounced the colonies to be
Stree and Independent States, The
Articles OF Confederation declared that
each "retained its sover eighty, freedom
and independence. The recognition
OF Great Britain was given not to the
Union or Contederacy, but to the
States; and King George Ill acknow-
ledged the "UDited States-namely,
new hampshire, Massachusetts Bay,
|. North Carolina, South Caro-
lima. and Georgia to be free, sovereign
and Independent States.D And Con.
gress declared that every ihhabftant of
any ofthe colonies'owed dAeqiaace there
to. To assert, then, that the states
were not sovereign under the Confed-
eracy is to contradict not only the plain
iacts OF history, but the Articles of
Confederation themselves.
Ihe second argument, then, is the
more plausfble-to-w wit, that by the
closer Union Of 1857, the States surren-
dered their sovereign character. The
fact which has given plausibility to this
theory is that there was party in the
Convention, of which Hamilton was the
leader, which desired to substitute a
National Sovereignty for a Federal
Union o. S0verelgn States; and that,
The Constitution being the result of a
compromise between the two parties, !
some of the favorte phrases of the Ma |
tlonalists were retained. But Mr.. |
Stephens is surely right in saying that
sovereignty cannot be resigned by inn
plication. And further, while some
phrases that might bear such a mean
ing were retained, others, which dis
tinctly expressed it, were carefully
struck out. Thus resolution in favor
of "national government" passed be-
fore the purpose of Hamilton and his
trieiids was understood, was afterwards
Iescinded; and throughout the Consti-
tuition the word "National' was syste-
matically struck out wherever it oc-
CURED in the first draft, AID "United
States" substituted, The Preamble is
the great reliance of the Federalists of
to-day. On the strength of the words
1--WE, the people of the United States" |
they assert that the Constitution was
established; not by the States severally,
but by the people OF the Union over tile 5
States. But the history of the phrase |
breaks down this argument. 1t stood {
at first, IVES the people of New Hamp- S
shire, Massachusetts, and c
Georgia." But it was expected That a
some OF these States might (as for q t
while they did) refuse to ratify the Con- a
sttltu5ion, and it was accordingly pro- o
vided by Article VII ''that, on beino
ratified by nine States, it should come
into force as between the States so rat A
flying" 1t would be absurd to say, D
'We, the people of New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, New York,
md Georgia do establish" if Rhode Is
ard and New York should happen to et
eject the Constitution, and stand out Ia
II the Union, And for this reason d
'nly "the United States" was substi- Is
uted for an enumeration of the States n
which would have expressly excluded NJ
he present Federalst theory. But in al
act how was the Constitution enacted? m
Is it came from the Convention, it was at
lothlng more than proposal, or draft II
1 a Bill. What gave it force or made to
law? The ratification "by the StateS'' &c
which Mr.. Motley declares il never re- sf
eived, Dut winch the Constitution it. sh
elf, in Article VII, declares that il re
lust receive. How was it ratified p Sc
y the sovereign power and authority fe
each State, exercised by the sover- fe
ign people of the State, in the manner M
y State law provided as Che only mode an
which such supreme act of sovereign tn
7 could be done-namely, through a sn
onyention called ad hoe under the di- we
ection OF the State Government. In sir
hat character was it ratified? IL sic
)eaks for itself. AS q compact "be- wf
,eep the States," not as a superior law tu,
,er them. And Virginia and New CHI
ork. in ratifying, EXPIRE ssly reserved bl,
lie right OF Withdrawing, in case of tn
eed, the powers they had delegated to sic
lie Federal Government and Legisla-
ire; in short, the right OF secession. "T
In all the State Conventions the Fed
'alists were careful to repudiate the
instruction which is now put upon DIR
he Constitution. Hamilton himself at
as anxious to explain that the phrase TIN
hich termed the Constitution the s'su- Ii;
RENE law OF the land" meant nothing wi
!
nj in no way conferred anv power or wi
on the Federal Government no
,yond the express limits of the Con- ge
tuition. tht
Mr.. Stephens interlocutors here tie
tote speech of Webster's, in which tire
at great party leader, for the pur- for
,ses of a particular occasion, repudi- inc
ed and denounced the term stcom- WI
let" employed by Calhoun to desig- brC
lte the Constitution. The dispute We;
rs not me- iely verbal, the matter re- VIII
ly in controversy being nothing less fou
an the great issue between Federal anC
ID State sovereignty. Mr.. Stephens till
torts by reading Caihoun's reply, in qua
lch his opponent is overwhelmed by ne,
Citations from every great authority, STR
licial and political, in Which the
,rd compact" is usedas Calhoun had
ed it, and with the same idea inVolv-
in its use, finishing with several such v
ations from Webster himself. After is b
s-the ouly attempt at a rhetorical goo
vantage or mere controversial victory inv
the volume MIR. Stephens proceeds con
cite variety of authorities asserting ten
sovereign character of the States yiol
der the Constitution of 1887. Thus per
dge Washington, of the Supreme bef
urt, says: "They are, in their separ- it is
political capacities, sovereign and get
!ependens, except so far as they have SON
tied Tor their common defense and in /
national purposes. They have each stra
Constitution and form of govern the
mt. 1oih all the attributes of souereiqatg." saul
9bster, writing to the Barings, and this
,aking as lawyer in answer to le- kin,
question, says the same thing in labC
rds as strong or stronger. The Sem and
+, in 1887 and in 1860, formally re- com
we'd "that in adopting the Constitu- IN o
II the States acted severally as free, wei
lerelgn, and independent States,"- gest