Oregon Republican. [volume] (Dallas, Or.) 1870-1872, 1870-11-12

asserts, each State is an independent
Government and sovereignty, then the
general Government is mere creature
of the State; possessing no sovereignty;
for L Is ufdeniable, that he who ere.
ates, possesses the power to destroy
And then, the doctrine of the resolution
is all that was ever claimed for the
States under the articles of Confedera.
tion, they were then sovereign, it was
conceded, aud they could be no more !;
but it was also conceded, that while
each State remained sovereign, we
could have or possess no nationality,
and il was for this express purpose that
the several States consented to srrren>
der their sovereignty, to establish a
Government for the people, which alone
should possess supreme power. If
it be true that each State is an indie.
pendent Government, absolutely sover>
eign, then, with each State rests the
sovereignty of the Government; and
we have demonstrated in the United
States the singular and absurd phenon-
enon of thirty -seven sovereiguties under
one Government. The word sovereignty
has never received but one definition,
supreme, absolute, uncomfortable power.
Now, if each State possesses this kind
of powsf, it is most supremely ridiculous
to contend that they have and possess
no power to secede, for, remember, the
resolution says, that the general Gov
ernment is one Of limited powers,
granted by the several States as such,
aud that those powers are specific and
enumerated. We challenge any man
to point out specification or enumcra.
ton Of power in the Constitution where
by any one Of the States have expressly
delegated away the right to sever her
connection with the general Govern
ment and q State can only be
held in the Union legally, upon the
principle that We are a nation, not a
confederation of nations, and that there
is but one sovereignty in the nation,
and that rests with the people.
But what means this language in the
resolution 7 land all powers not con-
ferred upon 1t (.he general Govern
mcntl, remains with the States and with
the People" Ifa State be supreme in
power, Why not stop at the word States,
without adding, and the people ? Ba,
this phrase, and the people, is the
veil always used by the leaders of that
party 10 deceive the people We appeal
to Democrats, ask your leaders and
journalists what they mean by this
phrase do they mean the people of a
single state ? If so, then the resolution
ought to read, and all power not dele.
gated to the general Government is re-
served stverally TO the sovereign States
or to the people thereof" And if this
is what they mean, then any man of or
dinary discerument can zee at once the
propriety oF the argument made by
j. G. Calhoun and JEFF Davis, 10 sup
port of secession and if this Is the idea
they desire to convey. then it is sense
less to use the words, '.or the people
thereof" for TO say that the balance of
power belongs to State. or the people
of State, is simply repetition; the
two phrases are synonyms. both mean
ing the same thing; and it is but to
Eidc the deformity of the doctrine that
the word, people, is used at all. But If
they shall say that they do not mean
the people Of one State, independent OF
another State, possesses absolute power,
to whom, then, do they rcferr Is il to
the people of any given number OF the
States, or the people of any particular
locality? Most certainly not the pro-
position would be too absurd. Can they
mean the people Of oil the states IN the
aggregated Then. all is conceded, for
we claim nothing more.
And we hold it to be the true doc.
trine, that with the whole people rests
the sovereignty OF this Government.
The Constitution of the United States
said nothing about reserved powers,
nor, indeed. was it necessary, for it too
plainly indicated that the sovereign
power should rest with The people In
The aggregate, when 1t proclaimed TO tnc
world by It's preamble that we, the