Page:Southern Historical Society Papers volume 16.djvu/338

 332 Southern Historical Society Papers.

original composition of the general government, which though not expressed, was understood, and the doctrine heretofore presented to the reader in regard to the indefeasible nature of personal allegiance, is so far qualified 'in respect to allegiance to the United States. It was observed that it was competent for a State to make a compact with its citizens, that the reciprocal obligations of protection and alle- giance might cease on certain events ; and it was further observed that allegiance would necessarily cease on the dissolution of the society to which it was due.

" The secession of a State from the Union depends on the will of the people of such State. The people alone, as we have seen, hold the power to alter the Constitution. The Constitution of the United States is, to a certain extent, incorporated into the Constitutions of the several States by the act of the people. The State Legislatures have only to perform certain organical operations in respect to it. To withdraw from the Union comes not within the general scope of their delegated authority. There must be an express provision to that effect inserted in the State Constitutions. This is not at present the case with any of them, and it would perhaps be impolitic to confide it to them. A matter so momentous ought not to be entrusted to those who would have it in their power to exercise it lightly and pre- cipitately, upon sudden dissatisfaction or causeless jealousy, perhaps against the interests and wishes of a majority of their constituents. In the present Constitution there is no specifications of number after the first formation. It was foreseen that there would be a natural tendency to increase the number of States with the increase of popu- lation then anticipated and now so fully verified. It was also known, though it was not avowed, that a State might withdraw itself."

This comes from one who was an officer under the first Adminis- tration, and familiar with the interpretation of the Constitution by its framers.

Senator Wade, of Ohio (afterwards Vice President of the United States), in the United States Senate on February 23d, 1855, said : " Who is to be judge in the last resort of the violation of the Consti- tution of the United States by the enactment of a law ? Who is the final arbiter, the general government or the States in their sove- reignty ? Why, sir, to yield that point is to yield up all the rights of the States to protect their own citizens, and to consolidate this government into a miserable despotism. I tell you, sir, whatever you may think of it, if this bill pass collision will arise between the State and Federal jurisdiction conflicts more dangerous than all the wordy