the american republic-第41部分

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！


　a　State　in　going　out　of　the　　Union　does　not　cease　to　be　a　State　but　simply　resumes　the　powers　　it　had　delegated　to　the　General　government。　　It　cannot　be　　maintained　on　Mr。　Madison's　or　Mr。　Webster's　theory；　that　the　　States　prior　to　the　Union　were　severally　sovereign；　but　by　the　　Union　were　constituted　one　people；　for；　if　this　one　people　are　　understood　to　be　a　federal　people；　State　secession　would　not　be　　State　suicide；　but　State　independence；　and　if　understood　to　be　　one　consolidated　or　centralized　people；　it　would　be　simply　　insurrection　or　rebellion　against　the　national　　306　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　authority；　　laboring　to　make　itself　a　revolution。　　The　government　seems　to　　have　understood　Mr。　Madison's　theory　in　both　sensesin　the　　consolidated　sense；　in　declaring　the　secessionists　insurgents　and　　rebels；　and　in　the　federal　sense；　in　maintaining　that　they　have　　never　seceded；　and　are　still　States　in　the　Union；　in　full　　possession　of　all　their　political　or　State　rights。　　Perhaps；　if　　the　government；　instead　of　borrowing　from　contradictory　theories　　of　the　constitution　which　have　gained　currency；　had　examined　in　　the　light　of　historical　facts　the　constitution　itself；　it　would　　have　been　as　constitutional　in　its　doctrine　as　it　has　been　loyal　　and　patriotic；　energetic　and　successful　in　its　military　　administration。

Another　reason　why　the　doctrine　that　State　secession　is　State　　suicide　has　appeared　so　offensive　to　many；　is　the　supposition　　entertained　at　one　time　by　some　of　its　friends；　that　the　　dissolution　of　the　State　vacates　all　rights　and　franchises　held　　under　it。　　But　this　is　a　mistake。　　The　principle　is　well　known　　and　recognized　by　the　jurisprudence　of　all　civilized　nations；　　that　in　the　transfer　of　a　territory　from　one　territorial　　sovereign　to　another；　the　laws　in　force　under　the　old　sovereign　　remain　in　force　after　the　change；　till　abrogated；　or　others　are　　enacted　307　　　　　　　　　in　their　place　by　the　new　sovereign；　except　such　as　are　　necessarily　abrogated　by　the　change　itself　of　the　sovereign；　not；　　indeed；　because　the　old　sovereign　retains　any　authority；　but；　　because　such　is　presumed　by　the　courts　to　be　the　will　of　the　new　　sovereign。　　The　principle　applies　in　the　case　of　the　death　of　a　　State　in　the　Union。　　The　laws　of　the　State　are　territorial；　till　　abrogated　by　competent　authority；　remain　the　lex　loci；　and　are　in　　full　force。　　All　that　would　be　vacated　would　be　the　public　rights　　of　the　State；　and　in　no　case　the　private　rights　of　citizens；　　corporations；　or　laws　affecting　them。

But　the　same　conclusion　is　reached　in　another　way。　　In　the　lapse　　of　a　State　or　its　return　to　the　condition　of　a　Territory；　there　　is　really　no　change　of　sovereignty。　　The　sovereignty；　both　before　　and　after；　is　the　United　States。　　The　sovereign　authority　that　　governs　in　the　State　government；　as　we　have　seen；　though　　independent　of　the　General　government；　is　the　United　States。　　The　　United　States　govern　certain　matters　through　a　General　　government；　and　others　through　particular　State　governments。　　The　　private　rights　and　interests　created；　regulated；　or　protected　by　　the　particular　State；　are　created；　regulated；　or　protected　by　the　　United　States；　as　much　and　as　plenarily　as　308　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　if　done　by　the　General　　government；　and　the　State　laws　creating；　regulating；　or　protecting　　them　can　be　abrogated　by　no　power　known　to　the　constitution；　but　　either　the　State　itself；　or　the　United　States　in　convention　legally　　assembled。　　If　this　were　what　is　meant　by　the　States　that　have　　seceded；　or　professed　to　secede；　remaining　States　in　the　Union；　　they　would；　indeed；　be　States　still　in　the　Union；　notwithstanding　　secession　and　the　government　would　be　right　in　saying　that　no　　State　can　secede。　　But　this　is　not　what　is　meant；　at　least　not　　all　that　is　meant。　　It　is　meant　not　only　that　the　private　rights　　of　citizens　and　corporations　remain；　but　the　citizens　retain　all　　the　public　rights　of　the　State；　that　is；　the　right　to　　representation　in　Congress　and　in　the　electoral　college；　and　the　　right　to　sit　in　the　convention；　which　is　not　true。

But　the　correction　of　the　misapprehension　that　the　private　rights　　and　interests　are　lost　by　the　lapse　of　the　State　may　remove　the　　graver　prejudices　against　the　doctrine　of　State　suicide；　and　　dispose　loyal　and　honest　Union　men　to　bear　the　reasons　by　which　　it　is　supported；　and　which　nobody　has　refuted　or　can　refute　on　　constitutional　grounds。　　A　Territory　by　coming　into　the　Union　　becomes　a　State；　a　State　by　going　out　of　the　Union　becomes　a　　Territory。




CHAPTER　XIII。

RECONSTRUCTION。


The　question　of　reconstructing　the　States　that　seceded　will　be　　practically　settled　before　these　pages　can　see　the　light；　and　　will　therefore　be　considered　here　only　so　far　as　necessary　to　　complete　the　view　of　the　constitution　of　the　United　States。　　The　　manner　in　which　the　government　proposed　to　settle；　has　settled；　　or　will　settle　the　question；　proves　that　both　it　and　the　American　　people　have　only　confused　views　of　the　rights　and　powers　of　the　　General　government；　but　imperfectly　comprehend　the　distinction　　between　the　legislative　and　executive　departments　of　that　　Government；　and　are　far　more　familiar　with　party　tactics　than　　with　constitutional　law。

It　would　be　difficult　to　imagine　any　thing　more　unconstitutional；　　more　crude；　or　more　glaringly　impolitic　than　the　mode　of　　reconstruction　indicated　by　the　various　executive　proclamations　　that　have　been　issued；　bearing　on　the　subject；　or　even　by　the　　bill　for　guaranteeing　the　States　republican　governments；　that　　passed　310　　　　　　　　Congress；　but　which　failed　to　obtain　the　President's　　signature。　　It　is；　in　some　measure；　characteristic　of　the　　American　government　to　understand　how　things　ought　to　be　done　　only　when　they　are　done　and　it　is　too　late　to　do　them　in　the　　right　way。　　Its　wisdom　comes　after　action；　as　if　engaged　in　a　　series　of　experiments。　　But；　happily　for　the　nation；　few　blunders　　are　committed　that　with　our　young　life　and　elasticity　are　　irreparable；　and　that；　after　all；　are　greater　than　are　ordinarily　　committed　by　older　and　more　experienced　nations。　　They　are　not　of　　the　most　fatal　character；　and　are；　for　the　most　part；　such　as　are　　incident　to　the　conceit；　the　heedlessness；　the　ardor；　and　the　　impatience　of　youth；　and　need　excite　no　serious　alarm　for　the　　future。

There　has　been　no　little　confusion　in　the　public　mind；　and　in　　that　of　the　government　itself；　as　to　what　reconstruction　is；　who　　has　the　power　to　reconstruct；　and　how　that　power　is　to　be　　exercised。　　Are　the　States　that　seceded　States　in　the　Union；　with　　no　other　disability　than　that　of　having　no　legal　governments？　or　　are　they　Territories　subject　to　the　Union？　　Is　their　　reconstruction　their　erection　into　new　States；　or　their　　restoration　as　States　previously　in　the　Union？　　Is　the　power　to　　reconstruct　in　the　States　themselves？　or　is　it　in　the　General　　government？　311　　　　　　　　　　　　　　If　partly　in　the　people　and　partly　in　the　General　　government；　is　the　part　in　the　General　government　in　Congress；　or　　in　the　Executive？　　If　in　Congress；　can　the　Executive；　without　the　　authority　of　Congress；　proceed　to　reconstruct；　simply　leaving　it　　for　Congress　to　accept　or　reject　the　reconstructed　State？　　　If　　the　power　is　partly　in　the　people　of　the　disorganized　States　who　　or　what　defines　that　people；　decides　who　may　or　may　not　vote　in　　the　reorganization？　　On　all　these　questions　there　has　been　much　　crude；　if　not　erroneous；　thinking；　and　much　inconsistent　and　　contradictory　action。

The　government　started　with　the　theory　that　no　State　had　seceded　　or　could　secede；　and　held　that；　throughout；　the　States　in　　rebellion　continued　to　be　States　in　the　Union。　　That　is；　it　held　　secession　to　be　a　purely　personal　and　not　a　territorial　　insurrection。　　Yet　it　proclaimed　eleven　States　to　be　in　　insurrection　against　the　United　States；　blockaded　their　ports；　　and　interdicted　all　trade　and　intercourse　of　any　kind　with　them。　　　The　Supreme　Court；　in　order　to　sustain　the　blockade　and　interdict　　as　legal；　decided　the　war　to　be　not　a　war　against　simply　　individual　or　personal　insurgents　but　〃a　territorial　civil　war。〃　　　This　negatived　the　assumption　that　the　States　that　took　up　arms　　against　　312　　　　　　　　　the　United　States　remained　all　the　while　peaceable　and　　loyal　States；　with　all　their　political　rights　and　powers　in　the　　Union。　　The　States　in　the　Union　are　integral　elements　of　the　　political　sovereignty；　for　the　sovereignty　of　the　American　nation　　vests　in　the　States　finite；　and　it　is　absurd　to　pretend　that　the　　eleven　States　that　made　the　rebellion　and　were　carrying　on　a　　formidable　war　against　the　United　States；　were　in　the　Union；　an　　integral　element　of　that　sovereign　authority　which　was　carrying　　on　a　yet　more　formidable　war　against　them。　　Nevertheless；　the　　government　still　held　to　its　first　assumption；　that　the　States　in　　rebellion　continued　to　be　States　in　the　Unionloyal　States；　with　　all　their　rights　and　franchises　unimpaired！

That　the　government　should　at　first　have　favored　or　acquiesced　in　　the　doctrine　that　no　State　had　ceased　to　be　a　State　in　the　Union；　　is　not　to　be　wondered　at。　　The　extent　and　determination　of　the　　secession　movement　were　imperfectly　understood；　and　the　belief　　among　the　supporters　of　the　government；　and；　perhaps；　of　the　　government　itself；　was；　that　it　was　a　spasmodic　movement　for　a　　temporary　purpose；　rather　than　a　fixed　determination　to　found　an　　independent　separate　nationality；　that　it　was　and　would　be　　sustained　by　the　real　majority　313　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　of　the　people　of　none　of　the　　States；　with　perhaps　the　exception　of　South　Carolina；　that　the　　true　policy　of　the　government　would　be　to　treat　the　seceders　with　　great　forbearance；　to　avoid　all　measures　likely　to　exasperate　　them　or　to　embarrass　their　loyal　fellow…citizens；　to　act　simply　　on　the　defensive；　and　to　leave　the　Union　men　in　the　several　　seceding　States　to　gain　a　political　victory　at　the　polls　over　the　　secessionists；　and　to　return　their　States　to　their　normal　　position　in　the　Union。

The　government　may　not　have　had　much　faith　in　this　policy；　and　　Mr。　Lincoln's　personal　authority　might　be　cited　to　the　effect　　that　it　had　not；　but　it　was　urged　strongly　by　the