Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1869-05-08
SATURDAY MORNING. MAY s. 1869.
The Pettifogger's Plea Again.

The Republican claims to see no con-
Aection between the right of State to de-
stroy its constitution, as claimed by Mr..
Garfelde in his Vancouver speech and that
clause of the Federal Constitution which
proyides that 1.-THE United States shall
guarantee to every Statca republican form
Of government" and says that = Mr.. Gar
Gelde was not speaking i'll regard to the
powcrs of States to withdraw from the IL
ioa." The explanation admits in substance
what We intended to charge; that is, that
in indicating the right Of Congress to
place those States under military rule, to
deprive them Of representation and their
equal suffrage in the Scuatc, aud to go all
of the unconstitutional acts which have
been justified under the prcteXt Of recon-
struction. he assumes the major premise OF
secession, which is tie right Of Il State to
destroy mhat ii has ma3c, TO uado whdt IL
has done. This was the doctrine Of the
Southern orators. in and out OF Congress,
when Hcy were "spcaking in regard to the
powers of States to withdraw from the
Union" This is the doctrine under which
it was always held by Southern statesmen
of the Calhoun school, that the original
States could take themselves ont Of the
Union by repeating the ordinances by
which they had ratified the Federal Con-
stitution, for. said they, "Mc stream c"nn"f
rise higher tha, Tie .jountain, the creature
become greater tim the creator"
The Federal Government, backed by the
whole people Of the North. took issue with
this doctrine, as a hercsy which, ii itrrc-
vailed would break up the Republic; for is
it was held, ifa State could lawfully go out
Of the Union, having done so it might also
discard the republican form Of government.
SO that to prevent its going out was an in
dspensabc means to the end of maintain
ing the guarantee mentioned. Butwc now
find, at the end of the war n new party
maintaining that whilst State cannot get
out of the Union, it may discard its rcpub-
lcan form of government and cease to be
a State. This is clearly the position as
sumcd by Mr.. Garfieldc in his Vancouver
speech, in which he laid it down as an un-
avoidablc conclusion that
"when the States abolish this consti-
tuition, without making any provision for the
formation ola new one, or amending the old,
they instantaneously, reduced themselves to
the condition Of n Territory, and as such be-
came subject to the jurisdiction of the Union
and to Territorial government, the same as
Washington, Idaho, or Montana"
This is simply absurd. If the Constitu-
tional guarantee of a republican form Of
government means anything, State can no
more return to territorial condition than
freedman can by his own act again be-
come a slave. The Organic Law guaran-
tees the status Of the State as explicitly as
It does that of the citizen. and the attempt
Of the State to repeal or abolish its consti-
tuition, like that of the individual to forfeit
the charter of his personal liberty, would
merely be illegal and void
Our neighbor Of the Republican con-
fcsscs the full force of this argument, by
attempting tire folly upon which his less
se!f.re'iant leaders have not vcnturcd. of
answering it, and reconcilng the reduction
Of States to Territories with the Consttu
sional guarantee of republican forms Of
government. We uow quote from that