the american republic-第36节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


of　the　word　ratify。　　That　the　　framers　of　the　constitution　held　it　to　be　a　treaty；　compact；　or　　agreement　among　sovereigns；　there　is　no　doubt；　for　they　so　held　　in　regard　to　all　constitution　of　government；　and　there　is　just　as　　little　doubt　that　they　intended　to　constitute；　and　firmly　　believed　that　239　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　they　were　constituting　a　real　government。　　　Mr。　Madison's　authority　on　this　point　is　conclusive。　　They　　unquestionably　regarded　the　States；　prior　to　the　ratification　of　　the　constitution　they　proposed；　as　severally　sovereign；　as　they　　were　declared　to　be　by　the　old　Articles　of　Confederation；　but　　they　also　believed　that　all　individuals　are　sovereign　prior　to　　the　formation　of　civil　society。　　Yet　very　few；　if　any；　of　them　　believed　that　they　remained　sovereign　after　the　adoption　of　the　　constitution；　and　we　may　attribute　to　their　belief　in　the　　conventional　origin　of　all　government；the　almost　universal　　belief　of　the　time　among　political　philosophers；the　little　　account　which　they　made　of　the　historical　facts　that　prove　that　　the　people　of　the　United　States　were　always　one　people；　and　that　　the　States　never　existed　as　severally　sovereign　states。

The　political　philosophers　of　the　present　day　do　not　generally　　accept　the　theory　held　by　our　fathers；　and　it　has　been　shown　in　　these　pages　to　be　unsound　and　incompatible　with　the　essential　　nature　of　government。　　The　statesmen　of　the　eighteenth　century　　believed　that　the　state　is　derived　from　the　people　individually；　　and　held　that　sovereignty　is　created　by　the　people　in　convention。　　　The　rights　and　powers　of　the　state；　they　held；　were　made　up　of　　the　　240　　　　　rights　held　by　individuals　under　the　law　of　nature；　and　which　　the　individuals　surrendered　to　civil　society　on　its　formation。　　　So　they　supposed　that　independent　sovereign　states　might　meet　in　　convention；　mutually　agree　to　surrender　a　portion　of　their　　rights；　organize　their　surrendered　rights　into　a　real　government；　　and　leave　the　convention　shorn；　at　least；　of　a　portion　of　their　　sovereignty。　　This　doctrine　crops　out　everywhere　in　the　writings　　of　the　elder　Adams；　and　is　set　forth　with　rare　ability　by　　Mr。　Webster；　in　his　great　speech　in　the　Senate　against　the　State　　sovereignty　doctrine　of　General　Hayne　and　Mr。　Calhoun；　which　won　　for　him　the　honorable　title　of　Expounder　of　the　Constitutionand　　expound　it　he；　no　doubt；　did　in　the　sense　of　its　framers。　　He　　boldly　concedes　that　prior　to　the　adoption　of　the　constitution；　　the　people　of　the　United　States　were　severally　sovereign　states；　　but　by　the　constitution　they　were　made　one　sovereign　political　　community　or　people；　and　that　the　States；　though　retaining　　certain　rights；　have　merged　their　several　sovereignty　in　the　　Union。

The　subtle　mind　of　Mr。　Calhoun；　who　did　not　hold　that　a　state　can　　originate　in　compact；　proved　to　Mr。　Webster　that　his　theory　could　　not　stand；　that；　if　the　States　went　into　241　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　the　convention　sovereign　　States；　they　came　out　of　it　sovereign　States；　and　that　the　　constitution　they　formed　could　from　the　nature　of　the　case　be　　only　a　treaty；　compact；　or　agreement　between　sovereigns。　　It　　could　create　an　agency；　but　not　a　government。　　The　sovereign　　States　could　only　delegate　the　exercise　of　their　sovereign　　powers；　not　the　sovereign　powers　themselves。　　The　States　could　　agree　to　exercise　certain　specific　powers　of　sovereignty　only　in　　common；　but　the　force　and　vitality　of　the　agreement　depended　on　　the　States；　parties　to　the　agreement　retaining　respectively　their　　sovereignty。　　Hence；　he　maintained　that　sovereignty；　after　as　　before　the　convention；　vested　in　the　States　severally。　　Hence　　State　sovereignty；　and　hence　his　doctrine　that　in　all　cases　that　　cannot　come　properly　before　the　Supreme　Court　of　the　United　　States　for　decision；　each　State　is　free　to　decide　for　itself；　on　　which　he　based　the　right　of　nullification；　or　the　State　veto　of　　acts　of　Congress　whose　constitutionality　the　State　denies。　　　Mr。　Calhoun　was　himself　no　secessionist；　but　he　laid　down　the　　premises　from　which　secession　is　the　logical　deduction；　and　large　　numbers　of　young　men；　among　the　most　open；　the　most　generous；　and　　the　most　patriotic　in　the　country；　adopted　his　premises；　242　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　without　　being　aware　of　this　fact　any　more　than　he　himself　was；　and　who　　have　been　behind　none　in　their　loyalty　to　the　Union；　and　in　their　　sacrifices　to　sustain　it；　in　the　late　rebellion。

The　formidable　rebellion　which　is　now　happily　suppressed；　and　　which　attempted　to　justify　itself　by　the　doctrine　of　State　　sovereignty；　has　thrown；　in　many　minds；　new　light　on　the　subject；　　and　led　them　to　re…examine　the　historical　facts　in　the　case　from　　a　different　point　of　view；　to　see　if　Mr。　Calhoun's　theory　is　not　　as　unfounded　as　be　had　proved　Mr。　Webster's　theory　to　be。　　The　　facts　in　the　case　really　sustain　neither；　and　both　failed　to　see　　it：　Mr。　Calhoun　because　be　had　purposes　to　accomplish　which　　demanded　State　sovereignty；　and　Mr。　Webster　because　he　examined　　them　in　the　distorting　medium　of　the　theory　or　understanding　of　　the　statesmen　of　the　eighteenth　century。　　The　civil　war　has　　vindicated　the　Union；　and　defeated　the　armed　forces　of　the　State　　sovereignty　men；　but　it　has　not　refuted　their　doctrine；　and　as　　far　as　it　has　had　any　effect；　it　has　strengthened　the　tendency　to　　consolidation　or　centralism。

But　the　philosophy；　the　theory　of　government；　the　understanding　　of　the　framers　of　the　constitution；　must　be　considered；　if　the　　expres…　243　　　　　　　sion　will　be　allowed；　as　obiter　dicta；　and　be　judged　on　　their　merits。　　What　binds　is　the　thing　done；　not　the　theory　on　　which　it　was　done；　or　on　which　the　actors　explained　their　work　　either　to　themselves　or　to　others。　　Their　political　philosophy；　　or　their　political　theory；　may　sometimes　affect　the　phraseology　　they　adopt；　but　forms　no　rule　for　interpreting　their　work。　　Their　　work　was　inspired　by　and　accords　with　the　historical　facts　in　the　　case；　and　is　authorized　and　explained　by　them。　　The　American　　people　were　not　made　one　people　by　the　written　constitution；　as　　Mr。　Jefferson；　Mr。　Madison；　Mr。　Webster；　and　so　many　others　　supposed；　but　were　made　so　by　the　unwritten　constitution；　born　　with　and　inherent　in　them。




244　CHAPTER　XI。

THE　CONSTITUTIONCONTINUED。


Providence；　or　God　operating　through　historical　facts；　　constituted　the　American　people　one　political　or　sovereign　　people；　existing　and　acting　in　particular　communities；　　organizations；　called　states。　　This　one　people　organized　as　　states；　meet　in　convention；　frame　and　ordain　the　constitution　of　　government；　or　institute　a　general　government　in　place　of　the　　Continental　Congress；　and　the　same　people；　in　their　respective　　State　organizations；　meet　in　convention　in　each　State；　and　frame　　and　ordain　a　particular　government　for　the　State　individually；　　which；　in　union　with　the　General　government；　constitutes　the　　complete　and　supreme　government　within　the　States；　as　the　General　　government；　in　union　with　all　the　particular　governments；　　constitutes　the　complete　and　supreme　government　of　the　nation　or　　whole　country。　　This　is　clearly　the　view　taken　by　Mr。　Madison　in　　his　letter　to　Mr。　Everett；　　245　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　when　freed　from　his　theory　of　the　　origin　of　government　in　compact。

The　constitution　of　the　people　as　one　people；　and　the　　distinction　at　the　same　time　of　this　one　people　into　particular　　States；　precedes　the　convention；　and　is　the　unwritten　　constitution；　the　Providential　constitution；　of　the　American　　people　or　civil　society；　as　distinguished　from　the　constitution　　of　the　government；　which；　whether　general　or　particular；　is　the　　ordination　of　civil　society　itself。　　The　unwritten　constitution　　is　the　creation　or　constitution　of　the　sovereign；　and　the　　sovereign　providentially　constituted　constitutes　in　turn　the　　government；　which　is　not　sovereign；　but　is　clothed　with　just　so　　much　and　just　so　little　authority　as　the　sovereign　wills　or　　ordains。

The　sovereign　in　the　republican　order　is　the　organic　people；　or　　State；　and　is　with　us　the　United　States；　for　with　us　the　organic　　people　exist　only　as　organized　into　States　united；　which　in　their　　union　form　one　compact　and　indissoluble　whole。　　That　is　to　say；　　the　organic　American　people　do　not　exist　as　a　consolidated　people　　or　state；　they　exist　only　as　organized　into　distinct　but　　inseparable　States。　　Each　State　is　a　living　member　of　the　one　　body；　and　derives　its　life　from　its　union　with　the　body；　so　that　　the　Amer…　246　　　　　　　　　ican　state　is　one　body　with　many　members；　and　the　　members；　instead　of　being　simply　individuals；　are　States；　or　　individuals　organized　into　States。　　The　body　consists　of　many　　members；　and　is　one　body；　because　the　members　are　all　members　of　　it；　and　members　one　of　another。　　It　does　not　exist　as　separate　　or　distinct　from　the　members；　but　exists　in　their　solidarity　or　　membership　one　of　another。　　There　is　no　sovereign　people　or　　existence　of　the　United　States　distinguishable　from　the　people　　or　existence　of　the　particular　States　united。　　The　people　of　the　　United　States；　the　state　called　the　United　States；　are　the　　people　of　the　particular　States　united。　　The　solidarity　of　the　　members　constit