Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-03-29

OF OOtfdges- lDls VIII DO TIC coAuOee IL
teligence to the extremists. They would
have welcomed with joy deeds of death.
Let us hope that the era of permanent
peace and prosperity has dawned.
----.----s-----
THE GUARANTEE CLAUSE.
The constitution of the United States
(article 4, section A. provides that the
United States shall guarantee to every
State in the Union republican form of
government, and shall protect each of
them against invasion, and, on application
of the legislature, or of the executive,
(when the legislature cannot be con-
vened, against domestic violence" In
his review of this clause, MIR. Madison
said in the forty-third number of the
FederaliSt:
''It may possibly be asked, what need
there could be of such a precaution, and
whether it may not become pretext for
alterations in the State governments, with
out the concurrence of the States them
selves. If the interpOsition of the gen.
eral government should not be needed the
provision for such an event will be harm
| less superfluity only in the constitution.
r To the. second inquiry, it
may be answered, that if the general
| government should interpose by virtue OF
/ the constitutional authority, it will be
of course bound to pursue the
authority. But the authority of
the general government extends no
further than to'a guarantee of a republi-
can form of government, which supposes
pre-existing government of the form
which is guaranteed As long, therefore,
as the existing republican forms are con-
tinued by the States, they are guaranteed
| by the Federal Constitution. Whenever
| the States may choose to substitute other
| republican forms they have a right to do
| so, and to claim the Federal guarantee for
the latter. The only restriction imposed
upon them is, that they shall not exchange
republican for anti-republican conshtu-
tons; a restriction which, it is presumed,
will hardly be considered as a grievance. "
How far the Radicals in Congress have
departed from this Interpretation of the
fourth section of the fourth article of
4 the constitution of The United States by
one of the trainers of that instrument, IS
to be seen in the legislation of the last
| two or three years. The fortieth and the
present Congress have acted in the pre-
sumption that Congress was above the
people, and hence have denied all power
| to the States to amend their constitutions
in regulating suffrage. Assuming that
the duty of guaranteeing a republican
form of government" for State, was the
power to originate a government for
State, they have set at naught the whole
letter and spirit of republican govern
ment, and of the Federal government
What the Southern States have done, has
| been in obedience to the mandatory and
coercive policy of Congress. Georgia,
Virginia, Texas, and Mississippi were not
States, according to Radical law, when
| they ratified the fourteenth and fifteenth
amendments, and not being States de
| fdctO, three-fourths of the States have
never ratified these amendments. They
were compelled to submit to conditions
while they were held to be territories
which only States could subscribe to. The
guarantee provision of the constitution
(article 4, section 4, has been relied upon
by the Radicals to justify this reconstuc-
| ton infamy. Senator Morton says, and
| the legislation of Congress in dealing
with the Southern States has said practic-
ally the same thing, that when in the
judgment of Congress, the government
of any State of the Union is not repubh
can in form, it is the privilege of the
federal authorities to set aside such gov
ernment and substitute for it any kind of
an organization that may suit the will of
/ Congress. This doctrine has been applied
to States in Union, with their Senators
and Representatives in Congress, and with
all of the machinery of the State govern
ment in regular operation. 1t is, I'M
doubleday, the privilege of Congress,
when State applies for admission, say
the Chicago Times, to judge whether its
organic law secures to its people repub-
lican form of government, but that priv
lege does not extent to declaring what
shall be the character of the State con
stitution. Congress may refuse to admit,
but it cannot dictate to a territory,
| much less q State, what shall be
the nature and provisions of
its organic law. If authority so
to dictate be conferred by the section of
the federal constitution we have quoted,
it follows that the fountain of authority
to frame State constitutions is in Congress,
and not with the people of the States and
Territories. The authors of the constitu+
ton never supposed that the section con-
ferred on Congress power to act in regard
TO the form of government in a State, ex-
cept upon application of the people of The
State. Congress assumed that the pro-
yisional governments set up by President
johnson were not republican in form, be-
cause they did not provide for negro suf-
frage. and invest blacks with the privi-
lege of holding civil Office. The absurdity
of. this pretense for Interference
is shown by the fact that at the
time of the adoption of the federal
constitution, negroes were held as slaves
in all of the States except one. Johnson's
provisional governments abolished slavery,
and by so doing repealed all the laws APP
plicable to it, They therefore extended
the bounds of freedom and the liberties of
the people far beyond the original thirteen
States. The admission of State by Con-
gress must be considered equivalent to
an assertion that its government is repub-
lican in form. 1t is not of course, to be
supposed that Congress would permit
State to come into the Union under any
other form of government. The fact of
admission, therefore, in the absence of
any action to change the form of govern
ment debars Congress from exercising