Page images
PDF
EPUB

past, and humbly implore Him to keep us brothers yet, and to restore our beloved country to its former high estate.

while we faithfully seek to know and understand THE RIGHT.

THE NATURE OF THE UNION.

In the outset I would announce the character in which I appear before you to-day. I am not THE UNION-offspring of kingly oppression; here as a Northern or a Southern man, an nursed in a cradle of blood and fire, yet, HerEastern or a Western man; nor as a "Demo-cules-like, strong enough in its infancy to strancrat," which I have been; nor as a "Republi-gle the serpent that would have crushed it; recan. " which I am not, nor ever was; but sim- spected by every foreign nation, while yet the ply as an AMERICAN CITIZEN: more than con- dew of its youth is upon it; admired and ventent with the glory of that title, and ambitious erated by the oppressed of other lands; beloved only that it may not, now or ever, be sullied by every patriotic American; and alas! conby any act or word of mine. With profound temned and hated by none in the whole world reverence I have, from my youth, followed the but its own children: what is it? We were teachings of the great lights of our country, most of us born in the Union; we have been from WASHINGTON to the present day, and from reared under its benign influence; we have them learned to love the Union of the Ameri- daily and hourly experienced its protection and can people above all other human institutions. its benefits; we enjoy, through it, the name It is, with me, the preeminent embodiment of and heritage of American citizens; and yet we all national wisdom, beneficence, and greatness. are constrained in this day, when ungoverned At the age of sixteen I was solemnly sworn to malignity assails it on every side, and ruthless support the Constitution which sprung from hands are raised for its destruction, to ask the that Union, and on other occasions since, that strange and apparently superfluous questionoath has been repeated, until, by its influence, What is the UNION? My friends, strange as it combined with that of every year's added ex- may appear, upon this question turns much of perience, fidelity to that Constitution has be- the bitter controversy of this dark epoch in come an intimate portion of my very existence; our country's history. It lies in the foreground never to be destroyed, I hope, until that exist- of every discussion of existing complications; ence shall itself cease. Here and elsewhere, to and those complications have, to a great extent, you and to all, I declare that so far as any past grown out of the efforts of ambitious and unor existing causes of dismemberment are con- scrupulous men, to close the popular mind cerned, I am, in life or in death, for the UNION. against what the Union is, and to lead the peoA third generation has almost passed away, ple to regard it as what it is not, and thereby since on this day eighty-five years ago, the weaken their affection for it; a work better American people proclaimed themselves to be, fitted for fiends than for men, but which fiends as they had already in fact long been, ONE PEO- could not have done better than it has been PLE, and solemnly before the world united their done by men, who owe to the existence of the destinies for all future time as A NATION-a new, Union all the position and influence which they an independent, a republican, and as time has have sacrilegiously used for its destruction. As shown, a great nation. Three millions of peo-to ple were born as a Nationality on that day, baptizing themselves in streams of their own best blood, shed for liberty and national existence; to-day, the same Nation, grown to more than ten times its original numbers, a thousandfold increased in physical power, and standing so lately without a superior in moral greatness In the States where secession has been acomamong the nations of the earth, stains itself-plished, so far as ordinances of secession could O! shameful and horrid sight!-with the blood accomplish it, a period of more than thirty of its own people, shed in a strife provoked by years has been unintermittingly occupied by passion and madness-a strife such as men have their leading men, in convincing their people not seen before, and as the civilized world be- that the Union sprung from the Constitution of holds with perplexity, amazement, and dread. the United States; that the Constitution is a mere league between separate and sovereign States, from which any State has a constitutional right to withdraw at any moment, for any cause she may deem sufficient; that allegiance is due from every man, primarily and by superior obligation, to the particular State of which he may happen to be a citizen, and only secondarily and by inferior obligation, to the United States; and that the Government of the United States is a mere agent of the States, for particular purposes, with the privilege in any State to terminate the agency, as to itself, whenever it pleases.

Under such circumstances, you will not expect that any other topics than those which so sadly engross every mind, should be now presented to you. Our Country and its perils is the all-absorbing theme; involving an examination of the nature of our institutions, and a discussion on the startling rebellion which has burst upon us within the past six months, threatening their overthrow; and to that examination and discussion, in a frank and fearless spirit, but without exasperation or passion, I shall now address myself; earnestly invoking the supremacy of reason and of conscience,

them, we may leave them to time and to God; but with the errors they have disseminated we may never, without guilt, cease to contend; for, wherever they are implanted, the warm, all-embracing love of country, which should fill every American heart, withers and dies.

[ocr errors]

It is out of my power to conceive of views in | regard to our system of government, more false in their nature and more deadly in their effects, than those; and my undoubting conviction is, that but for their steady inculcation on the minds of a portion of the American people, until an entire generation have been educated to believe in them as fundamental truths, we never should have seen the terrible events of the present time. Those doctrines have undermined the broad and apparently immovable foundations of the Union, in every heart which has received them, and have accomplished, by insidious approaches and covert attacks, what open disloyalty, in the first instance, could never have effected. They have falsified and degraded the Union our fathers formed, and the government they framed to strengthen and perpetuate it; and the foreseen and designed result is, that while, a few years ago, the whole American people held their National Government to be the best the world ever saw, and their Union the most sacred object of their attachment as Americans, millions of them are now engaged in a fierce and desperate effort to destroy both, even though in doing so they destroy the best hope and refuge of freedom on the earth. Against such inexplicable and suicidal madness, I would appeal to you to-day. In doing so, I am, more than ever before, deeply convinced that a frequent and thoughtful recurrence to great fundamental doctrines and principles is the very life of a republic; and I shall therefore not rest upon the surface of passing events, but go back to the source of our grand fabric of Union and Government, and endeavor to renew our veneration and love for it, by exhibiting the organic and vital principles, upon which alone I consider it was erected, and resting upon which I believe it would endure as long as humanity itself.

When was the Union formed? is a question of far-reaching import in determining what the Union is: so much so, that it is the subject of systematic and persistent falsification among those who aim to overthrow the Union. Their idol doctrine is, that the Union is a compact or league between sovereign States; and to sustain and spread the worship of that idol, they must refer to something written down, as compacts and leagues between States always are. Therefore they fix upon the Constitution, and claim it to have been the origin of the Union. The South Carolina Convention, after passing an ordinance of secession, put forth an address to the people of the slaveholding States, the first sentence of which is a repetition of historical error on this point, in these words: "It is now serenty-three years since the Union between the United States was made by the Constitution of the United States." To say that the members of that Convention did not know this statement to be untrue, is to affirm their ignorance of history, and of the very first line of the Constitution. The Constitution itself declares why it was established-assigns several reasons; the

first of which is, "in order to form a more perfect Union:" words which are meaningless, if they do not affirm that a Union had before existed. And the letter of WASHINGTON, as President of the Convention, communicating to Congress the Constitution, stated that the Convention had "kept steadily in view that which appeared to them the greatest interest of every true American-THE CONSOLIDATION OF OUR UNION:" a form of expression, equally with the other, declaring the pre-existence of the Union. It is, then, not only historically true, but explicitly recorded in the Constitution, that, so far from the Union springing from the Constitution, the Constitution was the offspring of the Union.

Searching backward for the beginning of the Union, we find that on the first day of March, 1781, nearly five years after the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, which had been formed by the Continental Congress, in 1777, were finally adopted by the Delegates of the thirteen States, and became, during the few years of their existence, the bond, but not the origin, of Union; for we know from history that the Union existed before.

Again proceeding backward, we see that the Declaration of Independence began with this remarkable expression-“ When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another," and closed with the announcement "that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States." The phrase one people," applied to the people of the "United Colonies," can leave no doubt of the view they entertained of their relation to each other. They considered themselves united, as one people, and they referred to a Union then already in being.

66

Looking still further back in the record of events, we find that on the 5th of September, 1774, the Continental Congress, composed of delegates from all the Colonies except Georgia -which was afterwards represented-was convened in Philadelphia.

Though as far back as 1637 the idea of a confederacy between some of the Colonies had been presented; though a convention was held in Boston, in 1643, to form a confederacy among the New England Colonies; though in 1754 a Congress of delegates from seven Colonies was convened at Albany, and unanimously resolved that a union of the Colonies was absolutely necessary for their preservation; and a similar Congress of delegates from nine Colonies was held in New York, in 1765; all indicating the tendency of the American mind to intrench the separate and scattered communities within a citadel of union: yet the Congress which convened in Philadelphia, in 1774, composed of delegates appointed by the popular or representative branch of the Colonial legislatures, or by conventions of the people of the Colonies, and styling themselves in their more formal acts

REBELLION RECORD, 1860-61.

"the delegates appointed by the good people of | stitutions fit to nurture freemen. They were, these Colonies," was the first general or national government which existed in America: and its very assembling was a declaration of Union, as its act, nearly two years afterwards, was a Declaration of Independence.

On the day, therefore, of the assembling of that Congress, the grand idea of American Union attained its full development, and expanded into action. That was the birthday of United America-the natal hour of our hallowed UNION. We celebrate the Fourth of July for our Independence; but we take no note of the fifth of September for the Union, without which Independence would never have been achieved, or, perhaps, meditated.

Having thus traced back the stream of Union to its source, let us observe for a moment the character of the people who then commingled their fate, and the circumstances with which they were surrounded. They were, in language, lineage, and institutions, essentially one people, | as they then organized and consolidated themselves into one nation. Nearly the whole body of them were immigrants from Great Britain, or their descendants. They all acknowledged allegiance to the British crown, from which they had received their possessions and their chartered privileges; and all looked to the common law of England for the regulation and maintenance of their individual rights of persons and property. Trade between the Colonies was unrestrained. An inhabitant of one Colony might inherit from an ancestor or kinsman dying in another. They were not only bound together by community of origin, but by ten thousand ties of kindred and affinity, interlaced through every city, village, and settlement, from the Piscataqua in the frigid North, to the St. Mary's in the flowery South. They were, with partial exceptions, of the same religious faith, and read in their common language the same Bible. The history of England was the history of their fathers and their ancestral institutions, and whatever of glory was there written was their common inheritance as Englishmen. They passed from Colony to Colony, and from point to point, as freemen, and were equally at home in every place, and equally protected everywhere by similar laws, framed and administered by themselves. There were among them no transmitted feuds or hereditary animosities, no strifes of rival leaders or wars of factions, no struggles for lawless supremacy of one Colony over another, no greed of conquest from each other: from all these curses, flowing from the unholy passions of men and of races, they enjoyed in their secluded home a happy exemption, through their essential unity. Subjected, as they were, to annoyances and perils from the savage foes around them, who long threatened their destruction, they united their forces in the common defence, and worked on bravely and sternly, in the common cause of securing for themselves and their posterity an abiding and peaceful home, under laws and in

in short, by every circumstance surrounding their homes, by their relations to each other, and by their own expressed assent, ONE PEOPLE; separated, it is true, into thirteen several mu diverse interests, but still not the less in mind, nicipal organizations, having in many respects in heart, and in destiny, ONE.

of that people; and I ask you if it is not trueNow, my friends, you and I are descendants if you do not in your hearts know it to be true Revolution through which they were called to that when, in the incipient stages of the struggle, they magnanimously put aside all local differences and jealousies, and with one their lives, their all, against fearful odds, for impulse combined their efforts, their fortunes, the redress of their common grievances at the hands of the mother country, and for the independence which they resolved to achieve, they evoked an already existing feeling of unity, and did, in the very essence of the term, form a full, unreserved, and practical Union of THE PEOPLE, intended by themselves to be perpetual? Did they not, as perfectly as any people ever did, constitute and declare themselves a single and undivided NATION? Is there in all history an instance of such a union among a people who did not feel themselves to be, in every impor tant particular, the same people? Why, even before the Union was a fact in history, the feeling in the North in reference to it was expressed by JAMES OTIS, one of the leading patriots of Massachusetts, in the Convention of 1765, in the hope that a Union would be formed, which should "knit and work together into the very blood and bones of the original system every region as fast as settled;" and from distant South Carolina, great-hearted CHRISTOPHER GADSDEN answered back-" There ought to be no New England man, no New Yorker, known on the continent, but ALL OF US AMERICANS." And in the very hour of the Union's birth-throes PATRICK HENRY flashed upon the Congress of 1774, these lightning words: "ALL AMERICA 18 THROWN INTO ONE MASS. landmarks-your boundaries of Colonies? They Where are your Virginians, Pennsylvanians, New Yorkers, and are all thrown down. The distinctions between New Englanders are no more. VIRGINIAN, BUT AN AMERICAN." I AM NOT A after the Union was a recorded and mighty And when, fact in history, the united people through their Congress, organized the first form of government for the new-born nation, they solemnly tion, "THE UNION SHALL BE PERPETUAL." If wrote down in the Articles of their Confederaany further evidence is desired of the character of the Union, and of the intention that it should endure forever, recur again to that first line of our noble Constitution, declaring itself to have been established "in order to form a more perfect Union "-more perfect in its principles and in its machinery, and more perfect in its adaptedness for perpetuity.

The question, What is the Union? is answered.

STATE SOVEREIGNTY.

It is no league of States, no compact between | assert doctrines, and claim rights and attributes, different peoples, no treaty between rival pow- which are without a semblance of warrant, in ers, but a voluntary, complete, and permanent or out of the Constitution, and are at deadly coalescence of the several parts of one people, variance with the principles on which the for their common defence, and to secure to Union was formed, and on which its existence themselves and their posterity the blessings of depends, is as apparent to me as my own being; freedom and self-government. When I call to and I am not without hope of making it apparyour earnest remembrance, that this Union was ent to you. formed without any express or formal stipulation; that it rested in the outset solely upon the good faith of the people towards each other; that it was consummated before their Independence was declared, and in advance of any written form of General Government; that it was the free-will offering of the heart of the struggling Nation upon the altar of liberty; and that it was upheld and consolidated by sacrifices such as only a people truly united in heart would make for each other; you will, I am sure, join with me in ascribing to it a sacredness that should forever protect it against the parricidal blow. State pride-poor, narrow, vain, and short-sighted State pride!-rejects this broad and glorious view of the nature of the Union; but it is the only one consistent with history, the only one that can stand the test of truth, the only one which makes our double system of governments consistent throughout, the only one which satisfies the patriotic heart, the only one which can secure a happy future to this nation, or give stability to American liberty.

You will not, I am sure, complain of the time I have devoted to the exhibition of the true character of the Union, as the leading topic of this day's discussion. The views I have expressed are, in my judgment, entwined, as nothing else is, with the very heart-strings of our whole system of free institutions. It is therefore vital that the true nature of the Union should be impressed broadly and deeply upon the American mind. Error on many other points may exist, and be widely diffused, without serious injury; but error on this point is fatal. It is poisoning the minds of multitudes in Missouri, as it has already poisoned those of millions in the insurgent States. I believe it to be undeniably true, that not one of those States would have put on the livery of treason, had not a large portion of their people first been seduced from their fidelity to the Union, by the heresies that lurk under the glittering guise of STATE RIGHTS. As it is necessary in the prosecution of the argument, that I should assail those heresies, let me say here that I am as firm a defender of the constitutional rights of the States as any other man, and would as resolutely resist, by all constitutional means, any unauthorized infringement of them by the National Government. But I STAND BY THE CONSTITUTION; and in that position it is my duty equally to resist any attempt by any State to disturb the equilibrium of our system, by arrogating to itself powers and privileges not belonging to it. That the insurgent States VOL. II.-Doc.

15

Revolting though it be to State pride, I hold that no greater or more destroying error has ever been promulgated in regard to our noble system of government, than the claim of State Sovereignty, as advanced in the States which have ordained secession from the Union; and yet upon that claim is based the unprecedented rebellion that convulses this land this day. Viewed in any light, there is neither consistency, logic, nor truth in it. To believe in it, history must be forgotten, the simplest axioms of government ignored, the acts and testimony of the fathers of the country disregarded, and the plainest language distorted or contemned; all which, I need not add, has been done in those States, as I will endeavor to prove.

[ocr errors]

'Sovereignty is the highest power. For a State or nation to be sovereign, it must govern itself, without any dependence upon another power. It must have no superiors. If a State makes a part of another community or State, and is represented with foreign powers by that community or State of which it is a part, it is not sovereign." These are the simplest principles of constitutional and international law, affirmed by the greatest jurists, and recognized and acted upon by all civilized nations. Tested by them, no State in the American Union, except Texas, ever was sovereign, in any but a limited sense, and that, only within its own boundaries and over its own local affairs.

As to foreign nations, what act of sovereignty has any single State in the Union ever performed, from the Declaration of Independence, when the original thirteen announced themselves States, to the present time? Not one; nor could any of them ever have done such an act, without violating its obligations to the Nation of which it was a part. By the National Constitution, to which the people of every State irrevocably bound themselves, every attribute of external sovereignty is denied to the individual States, either in express terms, or by being vested in the United States. No State can make treaties with foreign powers, regulate commerce with other nations, declare war, or be represented by an ambassador, or other diplomatic agent, with any government on earth. For any purpose of sovereignty, one of the United States is no more recognized abroad, than the city of St. Louis is recognized in the State of Oregon, as a sovereign city.

Nor is it otherwise as between the States themselves. No State can, without the consent of Congress, enter into any agreement or com

pact with another State; or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not adınit of delay.

In every manner, therefore, the States are stripped of external sovereignty, which is, by the Constitution, vested in the Nation, represented by its National Government.

And not only so, but they are, in various respects, in a condition of dependence upon that government; as, for example, for a uniform coinage, for postal facilities, for an army and navy, for security against invasion and domestic violence, for the return of fugitives from service, and even for the guaranty of a republican form of government, if au attempt should be made to deprive them of it.

To speak of States as relatively sovereign, when thus situated as to foreign powers and as to each other, is a solecism seldom surpassed.

As to internal sovereignty, it is undoubtedly true that the States possess it in all matters of a local and domestic nature, except where prohibited by the Constitution of the United States; but beyond that they have not a single attribute of it. They may not coin money, lay imposts or duties on imports or exports, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, emit bills of credit, declare any thing but gold and silver a tender in payment of debts, or pass a bill of attainder, an ex post facto law, or a law impairing the obligation of contracts; all of which are matters of domestic concern and cognizance. Why cannot any State do any of all these enumerated acts of sovereignty, as to other nations, as to other States of the Union, and as to their own people? Simply and only, because the Constitution of the United States, speaking the voice and embodying the power of the Nation-including in the Nation every State-forbids it, and in doing so, declares the supremacy of the Nation over the individual States, even to the extent of controlling their government of their own people.

I repeat, therefore, the States are, externally, not sovereign at all, and are so internally, only as that Constitution does not declare otherwise. It matters not that their internal sovereignty is retained to a greater extent than it is surrendered or trammelled; the question is: have they surrendered, or has the Nation taken from them, any part of that sovereignty? If, in forming the Constitution, it took from them or restricted a single attribute of either branch of sovereignty, especially that purely domestic, it is their superior; if they voluntarily surrendered a single such attribute to it, or consented to a single such restriction, they themselves made it their superior. In either case they are not sovereign.

State pride rebels at the humiliation of the States, alleged to be involved in this doctrine; but there is no such humiliation in fact; for, have not the people of every State, in entering the Union, assented to this relative position of the States and the Nation? What is a State but a body of people who are a part of the Na

tion? And has not the Nation ordained the Constitution, which fixes the status of the General and State Governments? And have not the people of the States, with every opportunity of self-enlightenment, and without the slightest external pressure, by their most free and voluntary act in entering the Union, acknowledged the SOVEREIGNTY OF THE NATION over every matter which the people, in forming the National Constitution, deemed it necessary, for the good of the whole, to control by the aggregate power of the Nation? Is any other view consistent with the Union of THE PEOPLE, which our fathers consummated, and which has remained unbroken till this time? If we are one people, as I have shown we are, shall not that people ordain in their Constitution, what the whole and what each part shall be and do, and what the whole and each part shall not be and not do? If not, what becomes of the fundamental principle of popular government, that the majority shall govern?

The radical and pernicious fallacy of the State Rights doctrine is, in claiming that the people inhabiting a defined portion of the National domain, on emerging from their condition of dependence on the National Government, and entering the Union as a State, instead of remaining, as they were, a part of the Nation, become, through their State organization, segregated from it, and exalted by the act of Congress admitting them as a State, to a position of sovereignty higher than that of the Nation. From this error flows, as a necessary consequence, the equally pernicious fallacy, that the constitutional supremacy of the National Government is something extraneous and antagonistic, imposed upon the States without their consent; when, in truth, it is the power which the people of the States have themselves created, and is therefore just as much their creature as the governments of their States. They established both, and both, in their respective spheres, are complete and predominant. While they remain in their several positions, there can be no collision between them. The only conflicts that have ever arisen between National and State authority, have resulted from claiming unconstitutional powers and rights for the States, not from aggressions upon the States by the General Government. The claim of State sovereignty has provoked them all, as it is at the bottom of the fearful strife now agitating the country; and permanent peace cannot be expected until that claim, as advanced in the South, is abandoned.

But while this claim of State sovereignty must be acknowledged by all candid men to be inconsistent with and subversive of the National Constitution, and at war with the first principles of the Union, it is boldly asserted that, aback of all constitutions, and above all written forms of government, there is a reserved power of State sovereignty, paramount to that of the Nation, in virtue of which any State may at any time cast off its obligations to the Union,

« PreviousContinue »