Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1879-12-20
MCPHERSON DAVIS AND THE CON
@THTUTHON.

Democratic party IS conservative
and the Republican party revolu-
tionary as regard the constitution,
the former in resisting, the latter in
promoting the conversion of our
Federal Union of States into CEN
tralized bureaucracy at the mercy of
the Federal executive. We have
the more pleasure on that accountin
publishing the following letter of
Mr.. Davis: that gentleman is treat
ed by Republican authorities as an
incorrigible secessionist, instead of
which we here find him devoted TO
the constitution all the more firmly
because Of his recognition ofthe pro-
tection which that instrument gives
to the sacred rights Of the States.
BEAUvoIR, HARRISON COUNTY,
Miss, Nov. 3, lS79.-J. B. Dam
forth, Esq.-My Dear Sir: I was
gratified by the receipt your letter
as token of your remembrance OF
one when, in former and in happier
DAYS, we were officially connected
with each other.
Twas also gratified by the receipt
of a copy of your paper, the Rock
Islander.
Tt so happened that at the time a
| local candidate had called to visit
me. and the conversation turned up
on the time-honored doctrine OF
| State rights. Like many Others in
I k,.a hi 70 hn a
creed which peculiarly belonged to
the South. /, who have known, and
am happy to remember, men OF eV-
cry section true to the theory of a
Union voluntarily formed by sOver-
eign States, endeavored to explain
that it was not Southern idea, but
a historical fact; that it belonged to
no section, but sprang from the
/ brains of men who declared the in
dependence of the Colonies, and
formed the compact for a more per-
feet union of the States. TO prove
nv position | read to him your ar
ticle headed, aWhat is Meant by
State Rights% and was pleased t.
| see the effect which itprOduced when
he knew that it came from the State
of Illinois, and high up on the Mis-
sissippi river.
If there is anything which, more
clearly than any other, the trainers
ofthe Constitution did not intend to
i do. it was to submit the people oil
| the States to the unbridled will of a
majority of the people of all the
States. Sectional majorities have
changed; they may and probably
will change again; and the bulwarks
which alone can protect minOrltleS
| from the usurping tendency ola gen.
eral government is strict construc-
ton of delegated powers, and fair
observance of the reserved rights Oi
4 the States and of the people.
/ When the States delegated certain
functions to a general government,
the purpose was declared to be to
secure the blessings of liberty tO
themselves and their posterity.
The confederation, which had
been declared perpetual, was ter
minated to form more perfect
union of those States which should
agree to enter into it. Being with
out any precedent in history, but
taught by the examples of all an
Gent republics, of the rocks and
shoals upon which they had been
wrecked, a compact Of anton lCdS
formed lUhich must eUeI' stand q model
of auisoZonp on the part of those aClO
framed 1t.
The reservation of rights, as you
have forcibly presented, only marks
the limit between the powers of the
General Government and those
which the States and the people
thereof would continue to exercise.
This was to secure liberty to their
pOsterity, not to elevate new mas
fer to the throne from which George
| III. had been depOsed.
In the many years that have pass
ed since the formation of the Con-
stitutiOn, with the many Chief
Magistrates the South has given to
the Union, it seems strange that, in
this day. belief in the doctrine on
which the Union was founded, and
which was uniformly avOWed by the
men who illustrated its early his
tory, should now be regarded as
hostility to its existence, and II at
the creed of States rights should be
held as the synonym of desire tG
destroy the Union of the COnstitu-
ton. Truth is said to be eternal.
1t is well that it should be, for error
so far outstrides its stated steps that
otherwise we might fear whether
| truth would finally Oveftake II.
Those who have carefully noted
the usurpatiOn and oppression to
which the South was subjected alter
she had laid down her arms and
faithfully agreed to abide by the
laws of the United States. would
have no need to go further in order
to find a reason why the South was
sOlidified in defense of her rights OF
person and property. Would the
North, under like circumstances,
have been less so? Would they
have shown equal patience under
wrong?
1t is surely little less than fraud
to state that the assertion by the
| South of her right to protection
under the Constitution is equivalent
/ to q declaration on her part ola de
| sire to secede from the Union. Any
| logical mind would draw from these
| facts the reverse conclusion. 1t
| NAV serve the purpose of artful
/ politicians to fOment sectional dis
cord, and thus make solid North,
which, being the majority section,
can then WELD the power and APP
| prOpriate aa we'll the political as the
| financial dement's Of the General
| Government. But the mon who de-
| sire fraternal union and general
/ prosperity must see that it is not the
read by which either can be reach
/ ed.
! In 1860 the secessionists, per Sc, TO
/ use the phrase of that day, were
few and far between. They are felO-
! er 11OtU ana further 6etiCeeR.
1t is, therefore, utterly untrue that
State rights, as asserted here, mean
secession. And equally untrue is it
that there Il no freedom Of opinion
or of speech or the press among us.
Personal difficulties and family
feuds have been misrepresented as
political combinations to suppress
the freedom of elections, while, in
point of fact, our elections nave been
as peaceable and orderly as else
where. Indeed, there has been a
studied effort not TO permit any
riotous proceedings which could be
used by emissarieS as the means of
iniuring our reputation or ofinvali-
dating our elections.
Impoverished by a devastating
Il -