Rensselaer Union, Volume 11, Number 39, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 12 June 1879 — The State-Rights Heresy. [ARTICLE]

The State-Rights Heresy.

The debate in the Senate of the United States upon the Legislative, Executive and judicial Appropriation bill showed th*t the old heresy of State rights, in opposition Jto the absolute supremacy of the National Government, is not yet dead, as a Southern theory. Mr. John Ci Calhpun, the patron saint of this theory, hot only believed in negro slaved but also held that the Union is founded upon a mere compact or league between the States, actinain their organic and political capacity, and that, when anyone or in ore of them should choose to do so, ’such State of States would have the Constitutional right tol terminate the compact, and thus dissolve the Union. This heresy, more by the influence of Mr. Calhoun than by that of any other man, had, prior to the war, become the prevalent doctrine of the Southern people, especially those belonging to the Democratic party; and it was this heresy, in connection with slavery, that led to the great Rebellion, which it cost so much blood and treasure to conquer. Though Daniel Webster exploded it by argument half a century ago it still uved, ana finally dhlthinated in a terrible war.

The pleven States that openly engaged fa) the Rebellion claimed tfae right to manage what they oalled their own affairs in their own way, independently altogether of the General , Government, and, if necessary, to the extent of rejecting and wholly excluding its fiuthority. This right they asserted in their secession ordinances, and proposed to fight and did light for its maintenance. The loyal Stales, on the other hand, hrfld that the Government of the United States is within its sphere.the sovereign authority, clothed ample power to enact and exocute its own laws; that all the people are subject to this authority; and that no State can escape from its application and control, except by successful revolution. These two theories met each other on the field of battle, and, after a bloody contest of four years, the one conquered and the other was defeated. It was generally assumed after the war that the question was settled for all time that, under the Constitution of the United States, there are no State rights which imply any right of secession or resistance to the authority of tho General Government Calhounißm in all its forms was supposed to be a dead heresy. .The peoSle had decided by the swora that the National Government isnotonly a Government in the strictest ana fullest sense, but also the supreme Government in this country; and, consequently, that all State powers are subordinate, as compared with the central authority. j Some of the speeches recently made in the Senate —aA, for example, those of Senators Williams, Beck and Eaton imply, however, that the old heresy of State rights still lives in at least a portion of the Democratic party, especially at the South. These speeches remind us of those that used to be made by Southern men before the war, when they were threatening to dissolve the Union in certain contingencies; and it is worthy of note that this sort of talk is resumed just as soon as the Democrats gain political control of the two houses of Congress. We hear again the old story that the Union is founded on a mere compact; find also hear the new story that it is the province of the State Governments to enact all Election laws, anc|, hence, that the present Federal Election laws are an unwarrantable interference with their sovereign powers. The representative men of the South have never conceded that the rebellion was wrong or that secession was unconstitutional. All that they have admitted is their own failure, and even Jefferson Davis does not dispute this fact. They were right, though they had not bayonets enough to establish the right. The Rebellion was conquered; yet the theory which gave it birth still lives in Southern democracy, and to some extent in the hearts of Northern Democrats. Senator Blaine, in his late speech, did a good service in exposing this fact. The people should understand that the great heresy upon which the Rebellion was sought to be justified-is by no means yet extinct. It has not only not been disavowed by its former advocates; but has been openly avowed in the Senate of the United States. As formerly, so now, Democrats and Democrats onl j are the men who either put forward the extreme doctrine of State rights or accent lit as a true exposition of the Constitution. Had they controlled the Government during the war, the Rebellion would have been a success; and their control now would obliterate from the statute-bbok of the Nation nearly all the laws enacted to secure the proper results of the war. The way to prevent this result is to keep the Democracy out of power, and keep the Government in the hands of the party that conquered the Rebellion and saved the Union. The people should see to it at the ballot-box, as they did on the field of battle, that the supremacy of tho National Government is maintained against all its foes".— N. Y. Independent.