ates were never out of the union, but
that the individual colonies became States, only as belonging to the
United States. Consequently that the theory of a 'compact' between the
States and the United States is untenable, for at the time the United
States was born, the States did not exist.[1]
[Footnote 1: As Lincoln expressed it in his message of July 4, 1861:
"The States have their _status_ in the Union, and they have no other
legal status.... The Union is older than any of the States, and in fact,
it created them as States."]
To maintain the "Compact Theory" it is necessary to show that the
"Continental Congress" had no properly delegated national powers, and
to it the character of a national government could not fitly be applied,
and that the colonies when they separated from England remained
independent of each other, because as colonies they had been
independent. Therefore, that the initial clause of the Preamble to the
Constitution "We the people of the United States" referred not to all
the people of the United States in their collective capacity, but to the
people of the several States.
In fine, admitting, as all do, the Continental Congress to have been a
revolutionary body, exercising undelegated powers, the question is, Was
it, or was it not, a _de jure_, as well as _de facto_ national
government, and this is a question that cannot be answered absolutely.
These opposing views of the character of our constitution have been
stated not with the idea of proving either of them to be the correct
one, but solely to indicate the lines along which political parties have
fought their battles. Thus, it is hoped, the student will be prepared
for an intelligent consideration of the various political parties that
have existed in the course of his country's history.
To complete the statement of the underlying causes and fundamental
principles that have directed the course of our national politics, it is
necessary to give at least some short account of the natural causes that
have operated irresistibly to divide the North and the South in their
political thoughts and actions.
Why is it that slavery flourished in the South, but languished and was
gradually abolished in the North? Why is it that the stronghold of the
States' Rights doctrine of nullification and of secession was in the
South, and the citadel of the Unionists in the North? Why is it that
to-day the debate between high and low customs duties, is, to a
|