tucky.

PENNSYLVANIA IN 1809.

21

them done so, it would have shown unmistakably their approbation. But Virginia and her daughter, Kentucky, stood entirely alone. Not another State responded favorably to their "solemn appeal." Of the thirteen other States, six made no response, and the other seven passed counter-resolutions strongly condemning the course of Virginia and KenThis was the indorsement these resolutions received at the time! But "Pennsylvania adopted similar resolutions at a subsequent period,” said Mr. McDuffie, in a speech in Congress, in the winter of 1829-30. She did so, and this is the history of the case. The Legislature of that State, early in the present century, had come into collision with the United States Court, and so passed a set of resolutions. The Kentucky Resolutions of '98 had asserted that the General Government 66 was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers." The Pennsylvania Legislature reasserted this doctrine, and said: "It is to be lamented that no provision is made in the Constitution for determining disputes between the General and State Governments, by an impartial tribunal, when such cases occur." And it was accordingly "Resolved, That our Senators in Congress be instructed, and our Representatives requested, to use their influence to procure an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, that an impartial tribunal may be established, to determine disputes between the General and State Governments.'

Pennsylvania did thus, in 1809, indorse the Virginia Resolutions; but how did the other States indorse her action? Nine States responded to her appeal, and all opposed her amendment. Among these was Virginia and Kentucky! Not a solitary State concurred with Pennsylvania. Virginia herself declared "that a tribunal is already provided by the Constitution of the United States, to wit: the Supreme Court, more eminently qualified, from their habits and duties, from the mode of their selection, and from the tenure of their offices, to decide the disputes aforesaid, in an enlightened and impartial manner, than any other which could be created." And the preamble and resolutions, disapproving the amendment proposed by Pennsylvania, were adopted unanimously in both branches of the Virginia Legislature!

Pennsylvania, being a party to the contest, wanted the Supreme Court set aside and a new tribunal established; the other States, cool and impartial, knew and declared that no better tribunal could be formed. And Virginia, as if to efface every vestige of '98, decides unanimously against Pennsylvania. Ohio, in 1820, thinking herself aggrieved by the General Government, reaffirmed the Virginia Resolutions; but when the final decision was made in the Supreme Court, she quietly yielded to it, and gave up the contest. Thus it has been in all our history till the

22

HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES BEFORE 1789.

present rebellion. The aggrieved State has stood alone in its opposition to the General Government. The other States, like a board of arbitrators, have decided in favor of the Nation, and the aggrieved State has acquiesced in the decision. Thus would it have been now, had not South Carolina, without a shadow of foundation, alleged an interference with slavery on the part of the General Government as the reason for her action; and even with all the inflammatory appeals of the leaders, it is probable that a majority of the people of a number of the Southern States would have been found opposed to the action of South Carolina, had their real opinions been allowed any expression.

So much for the Virginia Resolutions and their indorsement by the people of the United States.

Having examined the Constitution, and the working of our Government under it, without finding any basis for the doctrine of State sovereignty, let us now glance at our history prior to the formation of the Constitution. Some, who deny any sovereignty to the States since the Constitution, seem to admit that they might have been sovereign before that time. And, universally, the advocates of the doctrine insist upon their sovereignty previous to the Constitution; and they do this with so much emphasis and assurance, that many, doubtless, have supposed such was the case. "No fact in our political history is more certain than that the thirteen colonies began the contest with Great Britain as distinct communities, and came out of it severally sovereign and independent States," says one writer. Nothing can be wider from the truth. The same writer, from whom I have just quoted, says: "There is a theory that we are one nation-one consolidated people; and hence the ideas of the indissolubility of the Union." It is not surprising that those who deny that we are a nation should hold to the sovereignty of the States.

If the States were sovereign before the Constitution, when and how did they become so? Were they made so by the treaty of peace with Great Britain in 1783? By the adoption of the articles of confederation in 1781? By the Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776? Or were they sovereign before that memorable declaration was made? It is difficult to ascertain the prevailing opinion of the advocates of State sovereignty, so loose and vague are their statements, though they assert, with abundant reiteration, that the States were sovereign.

In September, 1774, delegates from twelve colonies met to consider their condition, and take measures to redress the grievances of the mother country. They admitted in a bill of rights which was adopted, that they were subject to Great Britain, but complained of her treatment. A second Congress convened in May of the next year-Georgia being still unrepresented-and they declared their object to be to secure their rights, and restore harmony with Great Britain. There is nothing here

JULY 4, '76, THE NATIONAL BIRTHDAY.

23 that looks like any claim of sovereignty, State or National. In June, George Washington was elected to the command of the army, and he was commissioned on the 17th of that month. In the commission, the expression "United Colonies" was employed, and from that time was in common use. The chasm between the parties was growing wider, but all hope of harmony was not abandoned till July, 1776. From their first meeting, in September, 1774, the Colonies had acted in concert, with the exception of Georgia, whose delegates took their seats in Congress in September, 1775. And in their memorable Declaration of Independence they acted as a unit. The instrument itself commences with these words: When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for ONE PEOPLE to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another," etc. And in the concluding paragraph they do, in the name and by the authority of the good people of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States."

This fourth day of July, 1776, was the birthday of the Nation. The people, through their representatives, who acted expressly in their name and by their authority, declared themselves absolved from their allegiance to Great Britain. Before, the Colonies had acknowledged a common allegiance to the mother country, while they were independent of each other in their local concerns. Retaining the same indpendence as to local matters, they declared themselves absolved from their common allegiance to Great Britain; this was transferred to the nation which this very declaration called into existence.

Here was the germ of a nation. Whether it could maintain itself was to be decided by the arbitrament of the sword. Should the people who had taken this bold step fail in the bloody struggle, they would never be known as a nation upon the page of history. Should they succeed, their national existence would bear date from the 4th of July, 1776. And from that day to this, official documents in this country have referred to the 4th of July, 1776, as well as to the beginning of the Christian era. The celebrated Ordinance for the North-west Territory was "Done by the United States, in Congress assembled, the 13th of July, in the year of our Lord 1787, and of their sovereignty and independence the twelfth." So the first Constitution of Ohio was "Done in the year of Independence of the United States of America the twentyseventh." And the same has been done by South Carolina in her official documents. Her Constitution of June 3, 1790-the first ever made in the name of her people—was in "the fourteenth year of the Independence of the United States of America." And the ordinance of nullification, passed by a Convention in that State, March 18, 1833, was "done in Convention, etc., etc., in the fifty-seventh year of the sovereignty and

24 THE STATES NEVER HAD ANY SOVEREIGNTY TO RETAIN.

independence of the United States of America." Why not in the fiftyseventh year of the sovereignty and independence of the State of South Carolina? Error is always inconsistent and self-contradictory. Yet, now, this State says: "In pursuance of this Declaration of Independence, each of the thirteen States proceeded to exercise its separate sovereignty." They did nothing of the kind. The articles of confederation did, indeed, say: "Each State retains its sovereignty," etc. But in the pertinent and forcible language of John Quincy Adams, we may ask, "Where did each State get the sovereignty which it retains? In the Declaration of Independence, the delegates of the Colonies in Congress assembled, in the name and by the authority of the good people of the Colonies, declare, not each Colony, but the United Colonies, in fact, and of right, not sovereign, but free and independent States." "Where, then, did each State get the sovereignty, freedom, and independence, which the articles of confederation declare it retains? Not from the

whole people of the whole Union; not from the Declaration of Independence; not from the people of the State itself. It was assumed by agreement between the legislatures of the several States, and their delegates in Congress, without authority from or consultation of the people at all."

The Declaration of Independence did not make thirteen nations; it made but one Nation. The "ONE PEOPLE " of the United States of America became a sovereign, independent power, taking its place among the nations of the earth. Celebrations of our National anniversary have been held from that time to this. Abroad, we have always been known as one nation; 'before 1789, as well as since that time. South Carolina has had no foreign ministers at the Court of St. James or St. Cloud.

Mr. Jefferson Davis, in his message of April 29, 1861, says, that by the terms of the treaty of peace with Great Britain, in 1783, "the several States were each by name recognized to be independent." And so the Convention of South Carolina, in their declaration of causes, says, "Each Colony became and was recognized by the mother country, as a Free, Sovereign, and Independent State." The separate names are given in the treaty, it is true, and as Mr. Everett has well said, "Such enumeration was necessary in order to fix beyond doubt, which of the Anglo-American Colonies, twenty-five or six in number, were included in the recognition." In the Declaration of Independence, they are not separately named, and in the first sentence they are spoken of as one people. On the supposition of the recognition by Great Britain of thirteen distinct sovereignties, it is a little unaccountable, and perhaps not quite according to precedent in treaty-making, that three men should have signed the treaty in behalf of the whole thirteen. These sovereign States might have furnished, at least, one plenipotentiary apiece.

A NATION BEFORE A CONSTITUTION.

25

Neither the Declaration of Independence, nor the Treaty with Great Britain, made the separate States sovereign. Both had reference to the whole people the nation. From the fourth day of July, 1776, there was a Nation, but not a Constitution. It is sometimes said that the Constitution made the Nation. The statement is just the reverse of the truth. It requires a nation to make a constitution. And a nation may live for years without one. There was no pretense of any till 1781, though all the functions of a nation had been performed from July 4, 1776. In 1781, about seven months before the virtual close of the war, the Articles of Confederation were finally ratified, and went into operation. The Convention of South Carolina, in their declaration of causes of secession, are guilty of a grave historical error, when they say, “Under this Confederation the War of the Revolution was carried on.' That war was carried on and nearly completed before the adoption of the Confederation.

The Continental Congress exercised sovereign power, with the implied consent of the people. Justices Jay, Patterson, and Chase (all living in the time of the Revolution) all affirm, officially, that "the individual States had no true political sovereignty; the power passed from the crown of Great Britain to the people of the Colonies, and Congress acted as their representative. The States individually were not known or recognized as sovereign by foreign nations, nor are they now." Justice Chase says: "All the powers exercised by Congress before the Confederation were rightfully exercised on the presumption that they were so authorized by the people they represented, by an express or implied grant."

In 1788, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney, whom Mr. Everett speaks of as "the one name that stands highest and brightest on the list of the great men of South Carolina, said in the Legislature of that State, "The separate independence and individual sovereignty of the several States were never thought of by the enlightened band of patriots who penned the Declaration of Independence.' "Let us then consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each State is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, and may bring on us the most serious distresses." To these words, now shown to be prophetic, may be added those of John Quincy Adams, spoken in 1837: "The calculators of the value of the Union, who would palm upon you a mere cluster of sovereign, confederated States, do but sow the wind to reap the whirlwind."

And in 1839, Mr. Adams says again, "I speak to matters of fact. There is the Declaration of Independence, and there is the Constitution of the United States-let them speak for themselves. The grossly