The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1876-03-18
pAHcR NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.


Mr.. Baker, oi Indiana, member oi the
Washington house OF representatives, |
introduced Il Union resolution the |
| other day and compelled the Democrats |
| to 30 on the record. This resolution Is |
| in its phiascoloey so well considered, |
says the Chicago T5bmc, that it will hear
repetition. Let rs see.
| First sencncc: "Illc people OF the
| United States constitute one nation, and
mot mere conirdlcracy of States or mt
'tions.' lany person ever asserted that
the eoplc of tie United States constitute
| a mere coni,lrracy of States or that they
| constitute mere conii,lrracy of nations,
we never met the person or heard of him.
But this is not probably villa, Mr.. Baker
meant to shy, although his resolution, in
its wcll-conSi,lrrcd phrascology. says
nothing else.
| Second sentence: "Thr constitution
was formed by the people in their pri-
mary and individual capacity, through
'their delegates thereto duly constitu-
cd" 1t has been question whether the
constitution was formed "by the people
in their individual capacity" or by the
people of the States acting as citizens of
tue States, but the question is not impor-
tant any longer. The late war settled
it. But how ''thc people acting IN
their primary and individual capacity
formed the constitution through dele
gate therrto duiy constituted. is more
than we can understand. II this part of
the Baker resolution is wcll-considcrcd
phrascology we are mistaken.
Third sentence: "Ihc government
under the constitution. is one Of the peo-
pie, by the people, and for the people ;
in its appropriate sphere the government
in its nature IL is permanent and indis-
soluble, except by the action aud con-
sent of the whole people" This is
truth in anything but wcli-considcrcd
: phrascology. "Thc government is one
of the people," may be wcll-consldered
phraseology at Chicago, but is not else
where. And why 1.-The government
under the constitutional The govern
ment is the result of the constitution.
aud 1t could not be the government if it
were above the constitution. In its appro-
PIRATE sphere the government, is supreme.
If anybody holds that it is not, Mr.. Baker
has our permission 10 shoot lin on the
spot. That the government ispcrmaucnt
| nn .tn - lint tlut II +
and indissoluble in lis nature, except by
the action and consent OF the whole pco-
pie, we do not know. How govern
mcnt, in its nature permanent, is not
permanent in its nature when the whole
people act and consent, we cannot under
stand; and how government, indissOu-
bic in its nature. is not indlssolublc in its
nature when the people act ami consent,
we do not understand. What Mr.. Baker
means by an indissolublc government we
DO not know. An indissolublc union Of
the States under the constitution is IN
understandable phrase, but Mr. Bakers
indi, soluble and permanent government
except by the action and consent of the
| NiioiN It'IlN, J., " .bfV Jul
sion.
Fourth sentence: "No State Ia, any
right or authority to Judge of the con-
'stitutionality of the laws enacted by
Congress. or to nulliiy the execution OF
the same and all overt acts by any State
'or people thereof, of secession thcrcfrom,
or from rebellion against the same, con-
'stitute treason and the late war of the
rebellion for the ACKNOWLEDGMENT of the
Union was causclc,s and indCicnSible on
amy theory OF right or OF constitutional
law" What does Mr.. Baker mean by
overt acts OF secession thcrcfi ON or from
rebellion against the same accession
from what, rebellion against what:
The resolution il not of wcll-considcred
phraseoogy, but i'll its general drift is
sound in doctrine. The Northern Dem
ocrats refused to vote Tor it, probably be-
cause they could not understand it, but
they should have taken it down.