Dallas herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1849-1873, 1869-05-15
Texas "a state In the Union.

, Lexington,
/, Texas n state Ia the Union.
) FEsm the Lancaster Ia IntsllissRosT,l
Tho Supreme Court has decidet
that Texas was never out of III,
Union, and in rendering that YER
! diet has in effect pronounced the
, entire reconstruction patchwork oI
Congress 10 DO unconstitutional
and mere inert mass of dead legal
rubbish. Those who held the reins
Of government in Texas during the
rebellion sold certain bonds issued
TO that State in compensation for
her boundary claims, TO procure
material 10 be used in aid OF the
Southcrn Confcdcracy against the
United States. Tho Injunction was
desired 10 prevent tho payment OF
the money duo on these bonds, and
the petitioners alleged that Texas
being q State in tho Union could
not lawfully scccdc, that tho gov.
crnment set up after the act of scccs-
sion was not such n government rs
could bind the people TO allegiance
or lawfully dispose Of the property
Of tho State. The counsel for the
defendant set up tho answer that
the State Of Texas had severed her
relations to the Union so far MS to
DO disabled from prosecuting such a
a case rs this in tho Courts of the
United States. In rendering the
decisions Of the Supreme Court the
Chief Justice reviewed the question
of jurisdiction at great length. lie
admits that if Texas was out of the
Union ut the time these bonds were
sold the Court had no jurisdiction
and then proceeds to examine the
relation which tho State bore TO the
Union when created, and its status
under tho Constitution during the
rebellion. The following extract
will suffice to show the drift of his
argument. He says
A State, in the ordinary sense of
the Constitution, is n political com
munity of free citizens, occupying
territory of defined boundaries and
organized under government
sanctioned and limited by n written
constitution and established by the
consent of the governed. 1t is the
union Of such States under q COM
mon constitution which forms the
distinct and greater political will,
which that constitution designates
as the United States, and makes of
the people and States which com.
pose it one people and one country.
The State of Texas was admitted
to the Union in the year 1915, be-
ing invested with all the rights and
subject TO all the responsibilities
and duties of the original States of
the Union, and was represented in
Congress, until, in 1861, she under
took to break up her constitutional
relations with the United States,
and by n convention declared her,
self sovereign and independent
State, and subsequently united with
the other seeding States and aided
in tho formation of the Southern
Confcdcracy. In all respects and
so far as the object could be accom-
plished by ordinances of the Con-
vcntion, by acts of tho Legislature
and by votes of the citizens, the re-
lations Of Texas to the Union were
broken up and new relations to a
new government were substituted
for them. :
Did Texas in consequence of
these acts cease to be State? Or,
if not, did tho State cease to be
member of the Union? 1t is need
less to discuss at length the question
whether the right of State to
from the Union for any
cause regarded by herself as suhi-
cient is consistent with the constitu-
ton of the United States. The
union of the States never was
purely artificial and arbitrary rela- I
ton. 1t began among the colonies
and grew out of common origin,
mutual sympathies, kindred princi-
pies, similarintercsts and geograph-
ical relations. 1t was confirmed
and strengthened by the necessities
Of war, and received definite form,
and character, and sanction from
he articles confederation. By these
The union was solemnly declared to
BE perpetual" and when these ar
Licles were found to be inadequate
10 the exigcncics of the country the
Constitution was ordained ito form S
. more perfect union 1t is diff q
,ult to convey the idea of indissolu-
Die unity moro clearly than by these {
words. What can be indissoluble s
f q perpetual union made more per- q
Get is not. .. .
But the perpctuity and indissolu- /,
,ility Of the Union by no means {
implies the loss of distinct and in
lividual existence or of the right of h
by the States. Un- A
Ter the articles of Confederation
,ach State retained its sovereignty,
reedom and independence, and 1,
very power, jurisdiction and right r
lot expressly delegated TO the c
United States. Under the Consti- !,
ution. though the powers Of the "
itates were much restricted, still all
covers not delegated TO the United
itates nor prohibited TO the States !,
re reserved to the States respect U
vely or to the people. And we
ave already had occasion to re- :
lark at this term that "the people
{ each State compose a State, hav-
1g its own government and endow- b
with with all the functions es- G.
entail to scperate and Independent P
and that without the y.
tates in the union there could be !.
o such political body as the United Il
tates. (Nevada.l Not only, there b
IRE, can there be no loss Of separate D
- 1