Bismarck weekly tribune., 1885-06-26
Corporations not Sovereign.

f
In these times Of democratic administra-
ton there is much renewed talk about the
ancient doctrine of state sovereignty. In
the sunshine of democratic success this un-
dying political heresy is sure to be warmed
into life again. Now that the party is in
power once more, the old leaders find it nee
essary to open school for the instruction
of the raw recruits, and accordingly the
first lesson begins with the dogma about
sovereign states. The administration has
not yet had an opportunity to do much for
the old doctrine beyond rewarding its sup
porters with office, but the powers of the
federal government are passing into the
hands of state sovereignty men, and de-
cisions on minor points indicate what NAV
be expected after a time. A curious illus
tration is afforded in a recent decision
made by Controller Durham. Nj. Durham
is a. Kentucky democrat, and he had not
been in office many weeks before he found
an opportunity to decide that the direct
war tax of 1862 was levied not on the states
but on Individual citizens. The ruling is
harmless, but interesting as a pointer"
When the democrats gained partial con-
troll in congress, the first thing they did
was to revive the state-soyereignty notion
in the famous struggle over the federal
election laws. The administration is start
ing in the same way. The state rights
dogma was bred in the bone of the demo-
cratic party, and whenever an opportunity
offers it is sure to come out in the flesh. It
may be considered that the democrats have
abated the. secession and notification
features of the doctrine, but there is enough
Of it left to menace the best interests Of
the country. Under the specious terms of
"lOcal government and "hOme rule" it
would be possible for Mormonism to hold
sway forever in Utah, and for fraud and
violence to rule the south in defiance of the
trine ever brought up in behalf of anything
wise, patriotic or just? 1t has been used
for generation solely as a shelter and
refuge for National evils.
The voters who have come into public
life since the war ought not to be deceived
by the old State-soverignty dogma. The
secession notification features were shot to
death on the battlefield. What is there left /?
Simply the fact that the states are political
corporations, organized for local govern
ment, and subject under the constitution,
to the control Of national authority. How
can a corporation be sovereign? It is a
part of the claim: of the state sovereignty
pendent, and it mnst necessarily be true
that the position of any one in this respect
is the same as that of the others. No one
has yet asserted that some states are 'sSoy-
erign' and others not. How is it, then,
with the eight states that We're formed out
OF the old Louisiana purchase? Where do
they get their sovereignty? The fed
eral government bought them from
France. and paid for them out of
the national treasury. No man could law
fully go into one of these states OF acquire
a foot of land there without first getting
permission from the national government.
individuals still hold their lands in these
states as based on government title in the
first place. These states were at the outset
merely the property of the nation, and they
exist now as political corporations simply
because the federal government saw fit to
make them such. Deriving their entire
political character from the grant and con-
sent of the national government, they are
nevertheless precisely equal to ali other
states, and exist as political corporations
subject under the limitations of the consti-
tuition to the control Of national authority.
The national government made them what
they are. How can the creature be sover-
eign over its creator ?-Chicago Tribune.