The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-08-25
TINE SEAT or SOVEREIGNTY.
Judge Hammond or Tennessee DISCUSSES
Mr., Isolhwan Smiths Letter.

Mr.. e. Oldwam Smiih's ieUers
To THE EDITOR OF THE SuN--Sir' The
letter OF Mr.. Goodwin Smith in THE sun OF
Aug. Q upon the original character OF our
Union is interesting to any student OF our
institutions. should not dare to assert
n, but may with propriety ask the question
whether there does not lurk within il a
somewhat elusive fallaey. Ia II true, ex-
cept in a purely pathological sense. that
"two powers cannot both be sovereign in
the same territory?' OF course, when the
mind In searching for some seat OF all
sovereignty, such as we are accustomed
10 find, let US say, in the Crown Of the British
Empire, the notion OF divisibility Is in
comprehensive. But we may have APP
propriated an inept word to describe a
supreme power that, possibly, may be
divisihle or duplex in action In republic
at least il we confine our thinking to prac-
ticable considerations and be not too ex-
acting as to the philology. Have we not
established a kind Of shifting use OF the
word, entirely American in its character?
May not our Union within the boundaries
of Tennessee be sovereign as to all Federal
functions and the State likewise sovereign
as to all State functions? And is not this
true historically as well as practically and
theoretically?
But do not write this letter in a pre-
sumptuous controversial spirit, but for an
other purpose. 1t is to suggest that the
seat Of sovereignty is found in the State
celebrates acting in combination whether
within or without the compact Of Union
n,xl L., A. IA
called the ARTICLES OF Confederation pre-
viously to that the combination was ex-
istent by tacit understanding and, in fact,
as potentially in the exhibition of unity
as If there had been written compact Of
some kind. The original unity was found
in the British Crown, but that was 80 oper-
ated as to produce separation; then it was
continued, after separation, as above in
dictated; and it was in fact always existing,
every day and every hour, so that there
was never any other sovereignty" at any
time. The Constitution was not a COM
pact OF distribution OF powers 1t did not
create the State celebrates, nor did it
create the combination, or union, in the
verities of fact, whatever may have been
the theories about it. II was only per-
fectng the previous substitution of an
American unity for one that was British,
II | may so-e1press it, 1t recognized the
two already existing entities: n substituted
unity independent Of the Crown. to be
made more perfect" and the separate
celebrates, in each colony. always inter-
dependent and, in the Union, TO be left in
tact and now called States, instead of colo
nies-but never otherwise than united,
e1 recessitate rel. This more perfect union
was TO be made effective only through the
political forces abiding in the State elector-
ates, and no new political force was devised.
These celebrates were left unaltered and
free Of any thraldom, self created under the
Crown, 80 to speak. Not one Of them ever
stood alone. separated or apart from the
others, but all together in Union, patent
to all. and which always represented a
national power; just as certainly recog-
nizable and existent, historically. as the
other or State power, and just as essential,
In its existence. as a factor in the work of
independence that had been, at any mo-
ment, already done, or that remained
at any moment to be done, and, moreover,
just as Indispensable, when the convention
met, In the proposed work OF maintaining
the independence and national existence
that had been achieved--far more indis-
pensable, indeed, than the State celebrates.
The latter might have been abandoned,
but were not; the former could not have
been abandoned, and was not, Of course,
but made more perfect" This view was
deliberately and ably set out a year or more
ago in an article in the Harvard Lam Reuiesp
which | cannot now more particularly
cite
Every considerate mind, imagine,
should readily agree that the -sovereignty"
Of the State celebrates, self-existent be-
fore the Union, and left always supreme
until the war amendments, IL curtailed
or violated (shall we say demonstrations
allyf And certainly we may say ruthlesslv)
whenever the Union by any means under
takes to interfere with the regulation of
tho States electorate, by each State for
itself-a political force always, before and
after the Union and beyond its control. Abso-
lutte freedom from such Interference is the
essential principle OF the whole scheme.
The power TO interfere exists, no doubt, as
the power to commit murder exists. but
not the right. As long as there is no usur-
patton of interference, the sovereignty"
is easily located in the State celebrates
acting in oombination-no matter how.
just as easily as it may be located in the
King Of Mr.. Goodwin Smiths allegiance,
or in the King and Parliament as YOU will,
or in Parliament alone. II is supreme
power. that of the celebrates, called States,
acting in combination. whether with or
without the compact Of the Constitution,
by body of voters ordained separately
by each; whether the acting be by ma
jority OF the States or by all of them, or by
powerful minority possibly. in possession
OF physical power to support the action,
whatever it may be. That combination.
born OF necessity, existing as a potential
fact. both within and outside the Consti-
tuition. has never been wanting from the
dawn of independence until to-day.
II Is as likely to last as any other sover-
eighty known to history; but, also, as likely
to perish and give way to usurpation. il
not safeguarded by eternal vigilance.
f, 3. HAMMOND.
MEMPHIS, Tenn, Aug. %