Year: 1861

I


even is not in the National Constitution, no,


as is believed in any of the State constitu


tions. What is sovereignty With particu


lar sense Of tie term, would it be far wrons


TO declare it political community without


political superior2 Tested by this no one o


our States; except Texas, was sovereignty


and even Texas gave up the character in


coming iato the Union, by which act she &C,


knowledged the Constitution of the United
! States, and laws and treaties Of the United
States; made in pursuance of the Constitu-


ton, to be for her supreme law. The States
have their statutes in the Union; they have


no other legal statutes. 1. they break from


this they only do so against law by revolu-


tion. The Union, and not themselves sepa-


rately, procured their independence and their


liberty by canquest or purchase. The Union
gave each of them whatever Of independence


and liberty it has. The Union is older than


any of the States. In fact it created them as


States originally. Some dependent colonies


made the Union, and in return the UIion


threw off their old dependence for them, and


made the States such as they are. Not one


of them ever had State Constitution indie


pendent of the Union. Of course it is not


forgotten that all the new States formed their


constitutions before they entered the Union.


nevertheless dependent on and preparatory to


coming into the Union.


Unquestiouably, the States have the powers


and rights reserved to them by the National


Constitution, but among these surely arc not


included all conceivable powers, however mis-


chievious or destructive; but at most such


only as were known in this would at the time


as governmental powers, and certainly the


power to destroy the Government itself had


never been known as governmental. As a


merely administrative power, this relative mat


ter OF national power and States rights as a


principle is no other than a principle of gen.
eralityand locality. Whatever concerns the
whole should be confided to the whole General


Government while whatever concerns the State


should be left exc lusively to tho State. This


is all there is of tho original principle about
defining the boundaries between the two. as
applied to the principle with exact accuracy


is not to be questioned. We are all bound


by that definition. What is now combatted


is the position that secession is consistent
with the Constitution, is lawful and peaceful.
1t is not contended that there is any express
law for it, and nothing should ever be implied


as law which leads to unjust and absurd con-
sequences. The nation purchased with mon
ey the countries out of which several ofthese
States were formed. Is it just that they
should 60 off without leave or without refund


ing7 The nation paid very large sums lin the
aggregate. believe. nearly 500, ,000, ,OO0) to
relieve Florida from the Aboriginal tribes
Is it just that she should now 60 off without
consent, or without any return. The nation
is now in debt for money applied for the ben
eft of these so called seeded States in COM
mon with the rest. Is it just that creditors
shall go unpaid, or the present States pay
the whole? A part of the present national
debt was contracted to pay the old debt of
Texas. Is it just that she shall leave and pay
no part OF this herself1 Again, if one State
may secedc, so may another, and when all
shall have seeded. and none is left to pay
the debts, is this quite right to creditOrs3
Did we notify them of this sage view of ours
when we borrowed their money. If we now
recognize this doctrine by allowing the seced-
ers to go on in peace, it is difficult to see
what we can do. Others choose to go or to
extort terms upon which they will promise to
remain. The seceders insist that our Consti-
tuition admits of secession. They have assum-
ed to make national constitution of their
own in which of necessity they have either
discarded or retained the right of secession,
as they insist it exists in ours. If they have
discarded it, they thereby admit that on prin-
ciple it ought not to exist in ours. If they
have retained it by their own construction of
ours, that shows that to be consistent, tLey
must secede from another,i when they shall
fi1d it the easiest way of settling their debts,
or efecting another selfish or unjust object.
The principal itself is one ofdisintegration, of
and on which no government can possibly en-
dure. If all the States save one should effect
the power to drive that one cut of the Union,
it is presumed that tho whole class of the
seeded politicians would at once deny the
power, and denounce the act as the greatest
outrage upon State rights. But suppose that
precisely the same act instead of being called
driving one out should be called the seceeding
OF the Others, from that one. 1t would be exact
ly what the seceders claim to dc, unless indeed
to make the point that the one, because it is
may rightfully do. These poll
ticians are profound in the rights of minori- |
ties. They are not partial to that power
which made the Constitution and speaks from
the preamble calling itself "We the people,"
1t may well be questioned whether there is
to-day a majority of the legally qualified
voters of any State, except perhaps South
Carolina, in favor of disnniou.


There is much reason to believe that the Union
men are in the majority in many if not in all of tn,
seeded States. The Contrary has not been dem
onstratad in any one of them. 1t is ventur,d to
affirm that those even in Virginia and Tennessee
fear the result of an election held in military
camps where the bayone.s were all one side of
the question voted upon can scarcely be consider
ed as demonstrating popular sentiment. At such
nm election all that large class who are at once
for the Union and against coercion, would be CO.
creed to vote against the Union 1t may be affirm
ed without extravaganza that the free institutions
which we enjoy have developed the powers and
improved the condition of our whole people be-
yond any example in the world, of this we now
have striking and impressive illustration. So
large an army as the Government has now on foot
was never before known, without soldierin it
who has taken his place there except of his own
free choice. But more than this, there are many
single regiments whose members one and anLth
er possess full practical knowledge of all the arts
and sciences, professions, and whatever else,
whether useful or elegant, is known to the whole
world, and there Is scarcely one from which there
could not be selected President, q Cabinet q
Congress, and perhaps q court abundantly COM
petent to administer the Government, nor do say
this is not true also in the army of our late friends
now adversaries, in this contest, but it is so much
the better reason why the Government which has
conferred such benefits on both them and us
should not be broken up. Whoever in any sec
ton proposes to abandon such Government |
would do well to consider in Difference to what
principle it is that he does it, whether the substi
tute will be to give, or be intended to give, so
much good to the people. There is some fore
on this subject.


Our adversaries have adopted some declarations
Of independence in which. unlike the good old one
penned by Thomas Jefferson, they omit the words |
'are created equal" They have adopted tenn
porary national constitution, in the preamble of |
which, unlike our good old one, signed by Wash.
thav omit sfvo he ,Irgs