Litchfield enquirer., 1869-04-22

to the exigencies of the country, the Con stitution was ordained "t to form a more
 perfect Union. It is difficult to convey
 the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words. What can be indis
 soluble if perpetual Union, made nor. perfect, is not? But the perpetuity ani
 indissolubility of the Union by no mean,
 implies the loss of distinct and individua existence, or of the right of seIf-govern
 ment by the States. Under the articles oi tconfederation each State retained it's sove
 reignty, freedom and independence, and
 every power, jurisdiction and right, moi
 expressly delegated to the United State. under the Constitution; though the pow CTS of the States were much restricted, still, all powers not delegated to the Uni
 ted States, nor prohibited to the States,
 are reserved to the States respectively, or
 to the people. And we have already had
 occasion to remark at this Term, that $ the people of each State compose State, hay. ing it's own Government, and endowed
 with all the functions essential to separate
 and independent existence" and that,
 without the States in union, there could be no such political body as the United States. Not only, therefore, can there
 be no loss of separate and inde- pendent autonomy to the States, through
 their union under the Constitution, but it
 may be not unreasonably said that the pre- servation of the States, and the mainte- nance of their Governments, are as much within the design and care of the Consti-
 tuition as the preservation of the Union and the maintenance of the National Gov ernment. The Consultation, in aA its propis-
 ions, looks to an indestructibIe Union, conspos
 ed of understandable &ates. All the obliga-
 tions of perpetual union, and all the guar antees of the republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State.
 The act which consummated her admis- sion into the Union was something more
 than . compact; it was the incorporation of new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Tex a and the other States was as complete, as perpetual and as indisscluble as the un-
 ion between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revoca
 tion, except through revolutions or through consent of the States. Considered, thsre- fore, as transactions under the Oonstitu- tion, the ordinance of secession adopted
 by the Convention and ratified by major ity of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her Legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as .
 member of the Union. and of every citi- zen of the State, as citizen of the United
 States, remained perfect and unimpaired
 It necessarily follows that the State did
 not cease to be State, nor her citizens to
 be citizens of the Union. If this were otherwise. the State must have become
 foreign, and her citizens foreigners. The
 war must have ceased to be war for the suppression of rebellion, and must have become war for conquest ard subiupa- ton. Our conclusion, therefore, is that
 Texas continued to be State, and State
 of the Union, notwithstanding the trans-
 actions to which we have referred. And
 this conclusion, in our judgment, is not in conflict with any act or declaration of any department of the National Government.
 but entirely in accordance with the whole series of such acts and declarations since
 the first outbreak of the rebellion. But. in order to the exercise by State of q right to sue in this Court, there needs to
 be . State Government competent to rep-
 resent the State in it's relations with the National Government, so far, at least. as
 the institution and prosecution of a suit
 are concerned. And it is by no means a logical conclusion from the premises. which we have endeavored to establish, that the governmental relations of Texas to the Union remained unaltered. Obligations often remain unimpaired, while relations are greatly changed. Tie obligations of allegiance to the State, and of obedisnce to her laws. subject to the Constitution of the United States, are binding upon all citizens. whether faithful or unfaithful to them; but the relations which subsist while the obligations are performed are es- sentially different from those which arise when they are ,disregarded and set at nought. And the same must necessarily be true of the obligations of States and citizens to the Union. No one has been bold enough to contend that, while Texas was controlled by a Government hostile to the United States, and in afiliation with
 hostile Confederation, waging war upon
 the United States, Senators chosen by her Legislature, or Representatives elected by
 her citizens, were entitled to seats in Con. gress, or that any suit instituted in her
 name could be entertained in this Court.
 All admit that during this condition ol civil war the rights of the State as mem. ber, and of her people as citizens, of the Union, were suspended. The Government and the citizens of the State, refusing to recognize their constitutional obligations, assumed the character of enemies, and in. cured the consequences of rebellion. These
 new relations imposed new duties upon the United States. The first was that of sup. pressing the rebellion; the next was tha, of re-establishing the broken relations ol the State wth the Union. The first oi these duties having been, performed, the fnext necessarily engaged the attention ol 1 the National Government. The authority for the performance of the first had been found i1 the power to suppress insurrec. tion and carry on war; for the perform
 ance of the second, authority was derived from the obligation of the United States
 to guarantee to every State in the Union a republican form of government. The lat
 ter. indeed. in the case of . rebellion, which
 involves the Government of . State. and for the time excludes the national authori. l ty from it's limits, seems to be Q necessary complement to the other. Of this, the case Of Texas furnishes . striking ilinstra.
 tion.s When the War closed, there was no IGoverpment in the State, except that which had been organized for the purpose of va ging war against the United States That
 GoSernment immediately disappeared. The lchief functionaries left the State. Many tof tho subordinate officials followed their lsxAmpls; legal onsibilities were anhnll- led or greatly impaired. is It was inevitable