Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-09-05

which adorn that city. Here the little
fellow soon became q favorite. by reason
OF hls pleasan, disposition. and evident
mental elasticity. When he was ii years
Old he was. in the best sense. adopted
by Mr.. Thomas Bennett, who afterwards
became Governor OF South Carolina. lie
took young Memminger into his family,
and treated him az his son. He caused
him TO be carefully trained In the best
schools. and gave him full course in the
University OF South Carolina, at Column
ba. The young nan chose the law as
his profession. and gave himself to ns
study with a systematic ardor which was
crowned with complete success. lie rose
10 eminepce at the Bar Of Charleston,
where he had few equals. and no su-
perior. although he was the contem'
porary Of such men as John c. Calhoun.
George McDuhle Hugh s. Legare. Daniel
Elliott Huger, and James l.. Petigar Mr..
MemfnInger was distinguished for the
clearness and strength Of his intellectual
grasp. which was such that often his
statement OF his clients case secured
victory at the very opening Of the trial
When the stormy times or the bills
OF abominatiOns the protective tarihs
Of 1923 and iS52-came on, Mr.. Memmnger
as a lawyer. citizen. and member OF the
South Carolina Legislature took deep
interest in the question involved. lie
was Thoroughly southern in his opinions
and sympathies. but never an extremist
never "nrc-eater" lie had become a
citizen Of South Carolina, and Of the
United States, by regular process OF
naturalization In this he presented
marked contrast TO judah j. benjamin,
Of Louisiana, who was a native and SUD-
Ject OF Great Britain, and continued such
even when he was Il Cabinet officer OF
the Confederate States. Although born in
England Benjamin was n Jew. the son
OF a jew. and the descendant from Jews
even back for 400 years 10 Shem. the
son Of Noah. And he had all the marvel
lous intellectual power Of the highest OF
that people
Mr.. Mcmminger easily detected the
unsound basis Of the doctrine OF 'nulll-
ncation." and argued against IL with
Tower. He was a leader among the
great "Union and Coaction' party or
South Carolina. and, though "nulihcation
prevailed for a time. 10 WAS never revived
after 1888. But though he rejected inc
suicidal /concept Of notification, when
held that a state might continue I'm the
Union and yet nullfy It's laws within
hor bound. Mr. Memmingcr believed in
lilf itAUl % Ftt'rT4bH hliAs WIN 49,
State acted il out in 1880 This book on
his Life and Times" is very clear on
this subject and furnishes lessons just as
important for the present and the future
as for light on the past He defined the
right Of secession, showed its limitations
and might have saved the South from the
war between the States" If his views
ha1 been adopted. on 50 important a
subject, no cgousm or self-assertion ought
10 pe imputed 10 an honest effort 10
sustain the truth. The students His
tory Of the United States was COM
pleted and published some time before
this work on Mr. Memmingcr was pub
lshed 1t is. therefore. q subject OF
proper satisfaction to find that IL per-
fectly sustalns the view OF the lmita-
tons on the fright OF secession" Get
forth in that history on pages 1919, and
completely ovcrthrOws tho view Of the
extreme secossionists held by q few lead
ing men Of the South and which really
involved US in the worst consequences Of
the war" Hugh S. Logare, the scholar.
the lawyer the author, the Secretary OF
state. who succeeded Daniel Webster in
John Tylcrs presidency. held the sound
view, and expressed it as follows:
II viii suppose that this Constitution.
Of which We have been Boosting so much
for nearly half a century, is found out 10
bo a league between foreign powers.
When then, sir? Did you ever hear Of
one party 10 league having a right
not to judge for himself Of its meaning
mark the disunction-hut 10 bind the
other party by his Judgment? / admit
that there is no common arbiter-that
each Of the parties is 10 judge for him
self-dOos that mean that he shall judge
ID. nf l.T.f bot n
States Is as binding az compact be
tween individuals; IL creates what is called
by text writer's a perfect Obligation
We have a. right 70 Judge for ours Ives
says the extremist how far we are
bound by the Constitution or how far We
shall comply with it. Grant it, but what
of the other twcnty-three parties? Are
they bound by our decision?" r. Sod.
And John q. Calhoun held the same limi-
tati0ns as TO the right OF secession. II
was because he know that that right WAS
not an absolute right. bat revolutionary
in its nature. and that If exercised with
out the concurrence Of the majority, in
number and power. Of the states 1t would
lead certainly to war. that he taxed his
metaphysical accumen in inycntlng the
untenable doctrine of notification.
Nr. Memm.nger earnestly resisted the
secession movement o. laj2 In South Caro-
Ina His views were as follows:
Gle held. with Mr.. Calhoun, that the
relations existing between the several
states were defined in the Constitution
of the Union as compact Of agreement
from which one or more might have the
right to withdraw; but that the other
States. as parties TO This compact, had
the right to determine for themselves the
question Whether the seeding state or
States had sufficient grounds TO with
draw from the compact association, and
Inv coercive measures. # deemed neces-
eor-v 10 force the seeding state to re-
main a party to the copartnership or con-
federation in the event that they should
determine that the compact had been
broken without Just and sufficient cause.
In other words. that while secession from
the Union was a right, 1t was reVolu-
tionary right, and under the eircum-
stances then investing South carolina
would result In war l.. 2o2. rms Is
too clear for doubt and perfectly con-
trims the view set forth in the student
L. $"
country had not become huge cohsoiiud-
zion tending 10 a frightful abs1lutlSin.
J,ach state is still a sovereign 'as to all
reserved powers. The right OF seces-
sion" sim exists subject only to the
limitations above expressed. Ihat sactc'
rirbt was not surrendered at Appomat-
fox. General Grant never required such
d. surrender. Neither has that right been
Cvtinguished by the fourteenth amend
ment Making the negroes citizens docs
moi destroy the sovereignty Of each S'ate,
Nci oer is that right eXtlnguished by the
NM lppy words of the underwood Coh-
euutlon OF Virginia. That CONSTRUCTOR
may be changed by the free votes OF heI
PEOPLE. Il may yet, In the cohlliseii0'es
Of the future. be important loL o -
- safes IN exercise the right of Sc
nasst,n " Bu- when they do 1t must De
FAR a cause deemed sufficient by preVac
iant majority in number and strength Oh
an the sovereign states.
Daughters of the Confederacy'