Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1879-05-02

bat this anarchical theory again. If
the war did not practically demolish
it, the war was fought in vain. But
those who falsely profess to have ac-
cepted the results of the war do not ac-
cept its most important result. They
manifest determined purpose to force
upon the country a practical accept
ance of the theory upon which seces-
sion and dissolution is justifiable, and
which they in effect rejected when they
put in their Confederate Constitution a
provision that "no person of foreign
birth, not a citizen Of the Confederate
Estates, shall be allowed to vote for any
officer, State or Federal" They meant
that their section should be a nation,
but they deny that the political people
of the whole Union are nation.
The destructive league theory, which
has already been productive of so much
discord, and cost the country so many
lives and so much treasure, finds no
support in the history of the origin and
ratification of the Constitution, or in
the body of that instrument itself. The
resolution of the Continental Congress
recommending the assembling Of the
convention which framed the Constitu-
tion did indeed contemplate nothing
more than a revision of the articles
of confederation, the alterations to
take effect upon their ratification by
the Congress and the States through
their legislatures. But the very first
resolution adopted by the convention
itself in Committee ofthe Whole was in
these words: "That it is the opinion
of this committee that a National Gov
ernment ought to be established con-
sisting of a supreme Legislative judic-
iary, and executive" Thus at the
very outset the convention announced
its purpose to establish National
Government" and not series of
articles joining sovereign States in
loose confederation. And again, in
Committee of the Whole, before it had
been decided whether there should be
two Houses of Congress or only one,
as under the Confederation, the con-
ventipn resolved "that National
Executive be instituted, to consist of
single person, to be chosen by the
National Legislature for the term of
seven years" The mode of choosing
and the length of the term were after
ward changed, but the purpose of the
Executive" and National Legis-
lature" was not changed.
In submitting its work for ratifica-
ton, the convention did not pursue the
course indicated by Congress. Not
only did it form Constitution, instead
of merely revising the articles of con-
! federation, but it recommended the
submission of the instrument stto a
convention of delegates, chosen in each
State by the people thereof, under the
recommendation of its Legislature for
their assent and ratification" The
convention deliberately rejected the
proposition to submit the instrument
to the States, as Congress had sug-
gested, on the ground that 1T
ought to be approved by, and
derive its validity from the peo-
pie themselves. The course recon-
mended bytne convention was adopted,
and the Constitution was ratified by
conventions chosen by the people for
that sole purpose. The Virginia con-
vention accompanied its ratification
with this declarations: "We, the dele
gates of the people of Virginia,
| do, in the name and in behalf of the
people of Virginia, declare and make
known that the powers granted under
the Constitution, being derived from
the people of the United States, may be
resumed by them whenever they shall
be perverted to their injury or oppres-
sion" Thus the Virginia delegates ex-
pressed their opinion that the powers
granted under the Constitution were
| derived not from the States, but from
the people of the United States. Vir-
ginia statesmen afterward found it con-
venient to adopt different theory in
the interest of the slavery system.
AS has already been stated, Patrick
Henry and others opposed the adoption
of the Constitution on the ground that
! it established National Government
and not a league of States. Henry
assailed with especial vehemence
the clause which confers unenum-
Grated legislative powers upon Con-
gress. He often speaks of it as
"the sweeping clause" under which
Congress would have power to over
throw the States. Henry and his party
were right in asserting that the instru-
ment was National Constitution; but
when it was ratified by the people in
spite OF their opposition, they turned
short corner and asserted just the con-
trary. Having failed to defeat its adop-
ton, they applied themselves to the
work of making it practical nullity
by setting up theory of the political
system which they knew to be false.
They labored with no little success to
foist their own theory upon an instru-
ment which regulated that theory IN
every essential part. And their politi-
cal heirs have to this day been engaged
in the same vicious business. The
judiciary of the country have given
these statesmen little encouragement.
The first Chief Justice of the United
States, John Jay, often speaks OF the
Nation. He says that cases affecting
Ambassadors and like officers "ought
TO be cognizable only by National au-
thority;n that cases of admiralty 9 ne
cessarily belong to National Jurlsdic-
tion;" that :" all questions touching
the Justice due to foreign nations ought
to be ascertained by and depend on
National authority;" and so on. The
ablest iurists the country has produced
have not hesitated to speak of the
United States as u Nation, nor have
they countenanced the destructive
Bourbon theory that there is no such
thing as an American Nation. - Chicago
Times Ind. Dem. - uaseI 81
PROFESSOR QuINToN declares his be-
lief that at some future age of the world
man will have attained such a complete
mastery over the forces of nature as to
be able to communicate with his fell
lows over long distances, and from