The sun., 1882-06-18

| exhibits the meaning Of tho Constitution
as II was oxpoundcd by its best friends
| at tho time OF its enactment. by Rufus
| King. Oliver Ellsworth, John jay, Wilson of
| Pennsylvania. Madison. Pendlcton. and John
| Marshall of Virginia. lrcdcll OF North Caro-
| lima. and Rutledgc and tho Pinckncys Of South
| Carolina. Wo propose to illustrate the effect
| OF Mr.. Bancroft's exposition by u reference to
| one or two clauses which have received widely
different construction from that which their
| trainers and defenders intended they should
| bear. 1t may be we'll however. to first touch
on II question regarding which tho his
| torian preserves n noticeable rctcence and
that is tho inquiry. how far the right Of seces-
sion and the power OF coercion were supposed
by the Federal Convention and the subsequent
State conventions to be affected by the substitu-
| tion Of the Constitution for the articles Of con-
| federation.
| Tho preamble OF the Constitution sets forth
| that the new organic law is adopted in order to
insure n more perfect union" than was at
tainablo under the preceding system. The
words more perfect have been con-
strued. by those who affirm the power
of coercion, to mean more enduring.
But tho truth is that. whatever may have
been tho weakness OF the old confedcra-
tion, 1t did not consist In failure to assert its
own perpetuity. One of the articles Of confed
Grafton expressly provided that the union be-
tween the thirteen States should be "perpctu-
al while rs to tho power Of sustaining the
Federal bond by force, it is certain that the Con-
gress Of the confederation. up to the time when
the Continental troops were disbanded was
better qualified for such enforcement than was
the national Government established un-
der the Constitution for many years. or.
at all events. up to the war Of 1912. But. al
though such provision existed in the articles
OF confederation, 1t was understood to be valid
Just SO long rs the sovereign States assented to
1t. and no longer. All the States but two had
wholly or partially refused to comply with the
requisitions of the Congress. yet it was mover
seriously mootcd that the latter should attempt
the coercion even Of New Jersey which formally
ropudiated its obligations. Rhode Island, the
weakest of the thirteen States. had virtually
withdrawn from the confederation at tho time
when the Federal convention was convoked yet
no one seems to have challenged her right of
secession and if. in the debates in tho Federal
Convention and in the State Conventions subsc-
quently called to rntify its conclusions. we hear
little about the right of withdrawal and the power
Of coercion, 1t is because the very existence OF
those assemblies was conclusive vindication
of the right and denial of the power. The
Constitution itself. which. according to its
seventh article was to go into operation when
ratified by the conventions of nine States.
was essentially an ordinance of secession
openly violating the provisions Of the articles
of confederation. When We bear in mind. too,
that the opposition to the new organic law was
mainly centred in the States Of Massachusetts.
New York. Virginia. and North Carolina. we
can see that the Constitution might have been
carried into effect against the will Of the four
States mentioned. which represented u pre-
| ponderance of wealth and of population. Yet,
although here and there in State conventions a
voice was raised to point out the moral wrong
Of breaking the pledge OF perpetuity involved
in the old confederation. there was no wdo-
spread doubt touching the right Of eight or nine
| States or OF a smaller number to secede from
the old confederacy and to organize new
league. Nor was it anywhere asserted that the
States left behind. though they might be much
the stronger in point ofwcalth and population.
would have the right TO coerce their seeding
brethren into fidelity TO the old compact.
| There is another reason for the fact that so
little doubt is anywhere expressed touching the
| right OF u State to relieve itself. at any time
| from Federal obligations. The proposed Fed
| eral Constitution was Incompatible with the
| State Constitutions of certain States which,
| again. could only bo amended or abrogated in
| the way provided by themselves. The doctrine
accordingly put forward by the advocates of
| the Federal Constitution. and on which they
| relied for its adoption. was that, while State
| Legislatures might be bound by Constitu-
| tions. yet the people OF a State. assembled
| in convention. were bound by nothing were
| independent OF all organic laws, and. SO far as
| their own State was concerned. were absolutely
omnipotent To those who heard this doctrine
propounded it would naturally not occur that
| il the people of State assembled in conven-
| ton were competent. In the year 1883, to repu-
| date the pledge Of perpetual union contained
| in the articles Of confederation and to treat
| their own State Constitution as waste paper.
yet the assertion Of the same right by tho
people OF the same State. assembled in like
manner in 1860. would be construed az an act
of rebellion. to be dealt with by fratrcidal war.
Had there been any general misgiving respect
ing the lawfulnoss of tho power Of withdrawal.
of which the adoption OF the Constitu-
ton itself by the first eight States offered a
glaring example. 1t would unquestionably
have been formulated in the text Of
| tho instrument, or in the amendments
added to satisfy reluctant States. But to in
! troduce unsolicited such q provision in the
organic law would have looked like overt
| encouragement to disatfection and secession.
and. moreover. would have seemed pure sur
| plusage to those who bore in mind what con-
structOn had in fact been put on that article Of
| cOHleucIaliOn Wnlcn allrUcu perpetual union.
Luther Martin Of Maryland. indeed. relates
that he wished an amendment excepting citi-
| zens Of any State from the penalty of treason
when they acted expressly in obedience to the
| authority Of their own State, but it does not
appear. from Madisons minutes of the de-
| bates that a motion to that effect was actually
made. The protest of Luther Martin was lit
orally the voice Of one crying in the wilderness,
for. owing to the reasons we have men
toned. 1t awoke no echo; yet it has
been invested by subsequent events
with peculiar interest. The time may come"
| he said in the structures made by him on the
proposed Constitution in the MARYLAND House
Of Delegates when it shall be tho duty Of a
| state in order to preserve itself from tho op-
preston of the general Government. to have
recourse to the sword; in which case the pro-
posed form OF government declares that
every one OF its citizens who acts under
its authority is guilty of II direct act OF
treason; reducing by this provision the dif-
| Qtntn 10 Iic nltn, ,b,t a.