Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1885-08-08
SCHOOL HISTORIES.
Jefferson Davis Once More Explains His
idea of the Union aud the States.


| jefferson Davis Once More Explains Hi.
Idea of the Union aud the States.
The Jackson Miss Clari0n prints The
following letter from Jefferson Davis IN re-
Spouse to one in which allusion had been
made to a favorable expression OF opinion
by the West Station Miss Educational
J0rHdl concerning a Northern " School
History Of the United States :"
BEAUyoIR, Miss, June 20, 1888.
Colonel j. /. P0ccr CIqri1u Otice-DEAR
SIR; lnciosed with this I send YOU letter
on subject Of such importance as viii, no
doubt commend it to your attention. As
there can be no higher duty than 10 guard
against false impressions in the instruction
OF children, 50 there can be no care more
essential than the proper selection of the
school books In them to peryeTt history
and propagate untrue doctrine is to poison
The sources of our political streams ] have
not seen the book referred to- but judging
II by extracts given l ana surprised that it
should have received such an Endorsement
as is cited.
Among the less informed persons at the
North there exists an opinion that the ne
gro slave at the South was mere chattel,
having neither rights nor immuniJies pro
tected by law or public opinion. Southern
men knew such was not the case, aud 9TH
ers desiring to know could readily learn the
iacL. on that error the laudcd story Of
" Uncle TOMS Cabin was founded, but it
IS strange mat unitarian and shrewd
people ulU not ask why slave, especially
valuable, was the object of privation and
abuse? Had it been a horse they would
have been better able to Judge. and would
mos! propably nave rejected the story for
+-..
us ihproDa0iAlY, Many attempts have
DeGh mace 70 eyade and mlsrepIeSent the
eAhat5uEe OPINION OF Shei Justice fancy
III IIe brtu scott case, out u remains
ulI Il
o. FROM lhe statement. III regard to Fort
>uiip'tf' a chl-d might suppose that for
elSh army mad attacked the nited States
TCeIla-A!y could not learn that the State
oI SCUM oaroliha was merely seeking pos
9sSS!gA OF ioft on ner own SOIL, md claim
lll9 lhdl Aer grant OF Inc site mad become
VOC.
Inc tyrant plea OF necessity to excuse
uespcuc usurpatlon IS offered Tor the I'M
colsutuuohai Act OF emancipation, and
Ine poor resort 10 prGudlGe Is invoked IN
NE use OF LIt ePithet reoeillon "a word
map .-Cilote 70 me states generally, and
mos esl,eelIii!s 80 70 me sovereign mem
peI9 u d 1giu-l''ls union. Dut' aias Ior
Ile4i ancient pIes'I55' 'Igy nave even LOST
uic Piui5'i reverence 'l4ey Lau III .he consul
tUuoh' ana seem 50 SAt4h 10 ms R{uizIGg
tuition as to be described 3% TIE neutral
pronoun H. such language would be
appropriate 10 an imperial government
when IN aQsorpng. territories, required
the sVojected inhabitants to swear ale
glance 20 Ii.
Ignorance ana afuhee have combined
so to mlSrepresent the matter OF official
oaths in the nlted States that II may be
we'll to give the question more than pass
ing notice. When the sovereign, indie
pendent States ofAmerica' formed & consti-
tutional compact of union it was proyldedin
the sixth article thereof that the officers
of the United States and Of the several
States shall be bound by oath or affirm
alton to support this Constitution, and by
the law OF June !, 1883, the form of the
required oath was prescribed as follows !:
" /. a. B., do solemnly swear or affirm las
the case may be- that will support the
Constitution OF the United States,
That was the oath. The obligation was
to support the Constitution. 1t created no
new obligation, for the citizen already owed
allegiance TO his respective State, and
through her to the Union of which she
was a member The conclusion is I'M
ayoidable that those who did not support.
but dlu not violate, the constitution were
they who broke their official oaths The
General Government had only the powers
delegated to it by the States. The power
to coerce a State was not given, but en-
phaticallv refused Therefore, to invade n
State to overthrow its government by
force of arms, was a papable violation
of the Constitution. which officers
had sworn to support and thus to lew
war against States which the Federal
officers claimed to be. Notwithstanding
their ordinances of secession, still in the
Union. was the treason defined in the third
section of the third article of the Constitu-
ton: the only treason recognized bv the
fundamental law of the United States
When our forefathers assumed for the
several States they represented a separate
and equal station among the powers of the