New Orleans Republican., 1873-05-27
sTATE RIGHTS OF PETITION.

Few d;scourses have furnished such
mine Of comment as that OF Senator Car
penter. He is sound authority upon many
importan: questions. and certainly very
suficieu. witness Of what be means es to
Louisiana affairs. But the Senator, like
Homer or Clay or Webster, and other great
minds. sometimes ;lt.ers sentiments WHICH
authorize inquiry. and may justify dissent
Hon. Mr.. Carpenter desires to preserve
his persona! consistency as State slghts
Democrat, and pays the intellect and IL,
,entions Of Mr.. Calhoun some deserved
conplendation. Mr.. Carpenter has. with
others. the .igh. o: private Judgment
whether a federal law is consistent with
the theory Of the federal union. Nothing
else. The doctrine Q; State rights
is. ,ha. State IS the sole judge OF
the nature Of these rights and OF ''the
mode and measure Of redress It was
upon this principle that tie right OF with
drawal from the Union was based. The
righ. OF peaceful withdrawal was assumed
on the one side. It was denied on the
other. This right having been demon
s,ra:ed 10 have 70 existence, the rights
Of the States do no! exis: since there can
be no right which one must ask permis'
sion to exercise. The doctrine OF nullii.
cation differed radically from the right of
secession. Notification assumed a right
of daily Injunction npon any federal
law. It was an unqualified right OF State
veto upon any federal act. Every one
saw that no federation Of States would
have made such bargain as that. Hence
the people Of the South never adoped it.
TIE doctrine Of j. righ: TO terminate
connection in partnership by giving notice
Of intention to withdraw. settling up all
existing obligations and quitting the
concern was plain enough. But that
right Of withdrawal has been ,epudiated
and renounced. The term State rights is
then withou: meaning, except the right Of
petition. TO Congress and appeal to the
courts.
The power Of the federal government is
paramoun! TO adjudge in the last re.
sort all questions in which the States
are related to vre another and to the
United States. Why then should we not
change the phrase rights Of the States"
to rights of the citizen: The State has
no rights as such. The citizen has every
,igh. under tie constitution and these
rights are 10 be interpreted and enforced
under the authority OF the federal gov
In view Of tha. ''eye to the
political main chance. to which the Sena-
.or elsewhere alludes. it was natural that
the Northern Democra: should have re-
sisted the right Of secession. and it is an
innocent enjoynen: TO say that right
exists which they Lave aided to destroy.
Tie Jacobites long after all sorts Of oaths
of supremacy and succession 70 the House
o. Hanover. persisted in their secret and
social entertainments in drinking 70 each
other, holding the wine glass over tumbler
Of water. Thereby signifying by an ex.
pressiye pantonime. "orer Ike .cate' to
Charlie" when Charlie would have found
the same men in battle array to resist him
if he should have taken it into his ;mprovi-
dent head 20 come over the water 70 them.
=" State rights on the lips Of a Northern
Demccra. is bu: an 'over tie water to
Charlie business. l. means nothing. and
hurts nobody. If It can restore the con-
fdence Of the South. or 0: the North in
those who profess it, all right. So long
as i. is employed BY men who know that
Estate tights means nothing in the
world escep. tie right Of petition to Con-
grsss. or Of ap. cal to the Supreme Court,
j. is harmless. The So::hern Democrat
aided promptly in annihilating those rights.
al! should. we think, see the inconsist-
ercy Of their position. They now profess
. doctrine which they have aided practi-
cally ard perpetualIy to retute.