A review of the proclamation of President Jackson, of the 10th of December, 1832

Front matter

W-

V

,5) . • '^ > o V'

II. Norfolk, December 31, 1832

Who constitute that great Corporation and body politic I have called The People, which all in these now United States concur in freely acknowledging as their liege Lord and only earthly sovereign by whose fiat all our governments have been created and endowed, and at whose will they may at any time be rightfully dissolved and annihilated ? This is the question, which in my last number I promised to examine in this ; and I now will proceed to redeem my pledge.

No American is so ignorant of the history of his own country, as not to know, that prior to the commencement of our Revolution, there did not exist- anywhere on this vast continent, such a body politic as The People. Then whoever dwelt in America, was either a savage Indian, or the liege subject of some European Sovereign. Xone of the various savage Tribes who wandered over the surface of much of this continent, had then ever regarded themselves, or been regarded by any others as constituting a fixed Society acknowledging allegiance to any Sovereign, or as constituting that moral and accountable being called a State. Had any civilized man or set of men presumed, at that time, to assert his or their sovereignty here, the assertion would have been considered by all as sedition and the attempt to maintain it by force, as an overt act of treason against his European master ; fur all white men in America then claimed to be the loyal subjects of some such Lord.

It is true, that in British America, thei'e existed sundi-y tracts of country delineated upon the geographical charts as British Colonies, the inhabitants of each of which regions were formed into separate and fixed Societies, whose ati'airs were regulated by long-established governments, the power of each of which governtnents was limited by the particular boundaries of its own Colony, their acts having no obligation or force beyond the local limits of such territory. None of the^e governments, however, exhibited any such body politic as The People, for they all derived their powers, either mediately or immediately, from the British Kings, whose mere agents they ever had been, and then were. Nor were these Societies themselves known by any common name of distinction, but only as the Colony of Virginia, the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, of Canada, of Nova Scotia, and the like; for each of these communities was then sepai-ate and distinct, in all things, from every other, the Colonists being connected by no other social or political tie, save that of the allegiance which all acknowledged, not to any People, but to the Crown of Great Britain.

British misrule converted some of these subjects, wdiose loyalty had once been the highest boast, into sturdy insurgents against the authoi'itv they had before delighted to acknowledge ; and in triumphant victory they achieved that glorious Revolution, which, under different auspices, might have been branded as a traitorous Rebellion. This Revolution, however, .in dissolving the former governments, did not dissolve the former Societies ; and years before it was perfected, the Revolt had taken place. No hope could be entertained of ultimate success to this Revolt, unless some new government should be established in the stead of that which had been dissolved, to order and direct proceedings, to sanction acts, to speak and to determine for all its members. But by whom, and for whom, was or could such an Institution as government, be then ordained and established here ?

The general answer to this question is obvious. As all government supposes the pre-existence of some established Society, whose affairs it is designed to regulate, and the rules for the Civil conduct of whose members it is required to prescril)e, therefore, by none other than some pre-existing and established Society can any government be created or ordained. Even when foreign force is the foundation of government (as is too often the case), still as such force can only be exerted by some established Society over the will of some other Society, or some part of it, when this force is employed with success, the victor Society, while dissolving the former bonds of association of its vanquished antagonists, incorporates them as a part of itself, under whatever conditions it may please to prescribe, and so creates and ordains a government for them. But when the foundation of government is not force, but consent, it would be a paradox to suppose the consent of any others than of those who had the right to consent, that is to say, of the members of that particular pre-existing and established Society for .the regulation of whose affairs such government is designed. None then but the pre-existing established Societies in British America, could ordain a government for such Societies, except by force; and the government ordained by any one of these Societies, deriving all its powers from it, could have had no authority except over that Society itself.

When we apply this obvious general conclusion to the facts of the particular case, we must all be at once convinced, that all the primitive governments of the diiferent revolted Colonies of Great Britain must have been ordained and established by the f^everal Societies then existing in the revolted Colonies respectively, and for their own special and particular benefit. Therefore, that none of these governments could have had any other authority than to regulate tlie affairs of their own creators, and of none others. I say, that these governments must have been so established and so endowed, because at that time there did not exist, nor ever had existed, any such society or community as The People of America, or of the British Colonies in America, or of the revolted British Colonies in America, or under any other name or form, save that of the Colony of Georgia, of South Carolina, etc., etc. Therefore, by these several and distinct communities alone, all our primitive governments must have been, and in point of fact were, ordained and established ; and governments being so established, these several ommunities, their respective authors, thereby assumed to be, and so far as thej' were severally concerned, became, that great moral and accountable being, a sovereign State, which, having chosen the Democratic form for its goveniment, was known and styled the Commonwealth.

Doubtless the different revolted Colonies might, if thov had thought proper, have consented to amalgamate and blend themselves together into one single Society, and then have established

PROCLAMATION OF PEESIDENT JACKSON. 15

any sort of government wliich they cliose for tbis new community. Had tliey have done so, we should never have lieard of the State of Pennsylvania, or the Commonwealth of Virginia. In t^.iat event, none of these former communities wonld have possessed sovereigiity, the essential attribute of a State, for all M'onld have sunk and dwindled into mere municipalities, bodies corporate but not politic, created or permitted to exist, not by their own will, but at the will and pleasure of this other more august being " The Nation " by whatever name that " Nation " might have been pleased to baptise itself. But the patriot Sages of that day did not choose so to do.

Kor was this decision the result of any "State pride," or designed "to find advocates" in any " prGJudic3," although that prejudice might be " honest." No, it wae dictated by that profound and sagacious wisdom which can see the future in the past. These patriot Sages had read, and well knew, that Communities occupying different territories of wide extent, situated under different climates, professing diiFerent religions, long governed by different laws, having different manners, habits, customs, occupations, and, of coui*se, many different and conliicting interests, could never be melted down into a single Society, and kept together as such, but by a much stronger power than any which they thought it either safe or prudent to create. Such communities, while separate and distinct, might be well and easi\y confederated, nay, even um'ted, for many purposes useful to all and essential to some, and still continue to enjoy liberty in peace. But the day which should see them compressed into one Society, to be governed by a single overruling consolidated govei'nment, ■would be the eve of that on which their Freedom must be sacrificed to the power of an interested majority, in the very temple dedicated to its perpetual worship, unless the victim miglit be saved by arms.

Convinced of this, there was not one Statesman in any of these different Colonics at that day, who even proposed, or who even conceived, so far as we know, the wild and mad project of establishing a single Society, to be CDmposed of all the revolted Colonies, and to be regulated by a consolidated " National " government, stretching itself over all. This conception was the product of an after-daj. — How it was treated when it was first presented, I will show at some other time.

Does any one doubt now, whether the first governments established in these now United States, were ordained by the several revolted colonies, each acting as a Sovereign, for itself, and by itself, w'ithout any reference to or dependence npon any other colony ? Let him consult the history of that day, and he will find that the- Revolt was not a simultaneous movement of all these Colonies, but was effected in each by several successive acts performed at difi'erent times. Nay, that independent governments had actually been established in several of these colonies, and were in full operation before any declaration of Independence was uttered by them all when assembled in a general Congress, So true is this, that even to this day, it is a matter of amicable contest among several of these different communities, now States, which of them is entitled to the honour of first annulling the Royal Authority within its own domains, and proclaiming itself a patriot Rebel.

Massachusetts claims it and points to the fields of Concord and of Lexington to prove her claim. Virginia claims it, and mentions prior acts of Treason in Arms which she had dared to do, I^orth Carolina claims it and shews her written declaration of Independence, fearlessly pronmlgated to the world, while some others were yet in doubt which side to take in the struggle to maintain their rights. To Massachusetts and Virginia she might say, your acts of Treason were but Insurrections, for when you performed them you still professed to acknowledge yourselves dependants of the Authority you then resisted in arms ; but mine was the first act of glorious Rebellion, for by it I renounced my former allegiance and proclaimed my own Sovereignty.

Does any Virginian sceptic still doubt ? I refer him to the date of our first Constitution, to prove that this form of government was ordained and declared by "the Delegates and Representatives of the good People of Virginia" assembled in Convention, he/ore even the date of the declaration of Independence, and long before the signing and promulgation of that act. Referring him also to the language of that Constitution and of its accompanying Declaration of Rights, I ask him to tell nie, to whom, after the promulgation of these instruments, did the People of Yirginia owe any allegiance ?

He will not say, that their allegiance was then due to their former liege Lord the King of Great Britain, for in these acts, after first asserting " that all power is invested in, and consequently derived from the People — that government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the People — that when an 3' government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a nnijoritj of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right, to reform, alter, or abolish it " — the authors proceed to declare, " that the government of this Country, as formerly exercised under the Crown of Great Britain, was totally dissolved."

He will not say either, that this allegiance was due to any of the other Colonies, for none of them had any stronger claims to the allegiance of Virginia, than she had to theirs — nor that it was due to any government formed by all the revolted Colonies, for there was no such government at that time — nor to the People of the United Colonies, for no such People had ever existed, nor were these Colonies then united by anj^ political tie whatever.

"Were we then a gang of Banditti, a wretched horde of barbarians, a mere savage tribe, without law or any institution of civil polity to bind our society together by the strong bund of a common allegiance ?

Assuredly, we were not such, for to prevent this " deplorable condition, to which this once happy country must be reduced, unless some regular adequate mode of civil polity was speedily adopted," the same convention in the very act which declared the total dissolution of the former government, ordained " the future form of Government of Virginia." In this form of Government was proclaimed the name of this new body politic or sovereign by which it was created. This Sovereign was called, " The Commonwealth of Virginia," and all our people pledged themselves through their Representatives "to be faithfnl and true to this Commonwealth," and called upon their God to attest the solemn pledge.*

* The form of the present Oath of Allegiance in Virginia, or " the assurance of fidelity," as it is here called, is a curious and important instrument, to which I

Was this pledge violated by any overt act of force ? Tlie act was declared to be Treason, ar.d the proper punishment of this crime was announced. If it be true then, as the President in his Proclamation sajs, that " Treason is an offence against sovereignty, and sovereignty must reside with the power to punish it," the Commonwealth of Virginia which defined this crime against itself, provided for its punishment, and once at least inflicted, it must have been a sovereign.* But if ever a sovereign, she be-

Bhall probably refer at some other time. It runs thus : "I , do declare

myself a citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia ; I relinquish and renounce the character of subject or citizen of any Prince or other State whatsoever ; and abjure all allegiance which may be claimed by Buch Prince or other State ; and I do swear to be faithful and true to the said Commonwealth of Virginia, Bo long as I continue a citizen thereof. So help me God " (see Revised Code of 1819, Vol. I., p. 72).

No person has power to act in any office, legislative, executive, or judiciary, before he shall have given this assurance ; and all who may by law be reciuired to give assurance of fidelity, must for that purpose take this oath. [See the Law i(t supra, which was re-enacted on the 7th day of January, 1818.]

* The law of Virginia defining and punishing Treason, is the sanction of the oath of fidelity, and is not less curious and important than the form of that assurance. It is in these words: " If a man do levy war against the Commonwealth in the same, or be adherent to the enemies of the Commonwealth, within the same, giving to them aid and comfort in the Commonwealth, or elsewhere, and thereof be legally convicted of open deed, by the evidence of two sufficient and lawful witnesses, or his own voluntary confession, the cases above rehearsed shall be judged Treason which extendeth to the Commonwealth, and the persons so convicted, and, his or her aiders, abettors and counsellors, being thereof convicted, shall suffer death, by hanging by the neck without benefit of clergy. Also, every person or persons, who shall erect or establish, or cause or procure to be erected or established, any government separate from, or independent of the government of Virginia, within the limits thereof, unless by act of the Legisla tare of this Commonwealth for that purpose first obtained ; or who shall, in any such usurped government, hold or execute any office, legislative, executive, judiciary, or ministerial, by whatever name such office may be distinguished or called ; or who shall swear, or otherwise solcnuily profess allegiance or fidelity to the same ; or who shall, under pretext of authority derived from, or protection afforded by, such usurped government resist or oppose the due execution of the laws of this Commonwealth, shall be adjudged guilty of high Treason, and shall be proceeded against, and punished in the same manner as other Traitors may be proceeded against and punished." — [See Revised Codeof 1819, Vol. I., p. ."jOl.]

The scholar may read the rough English of some parts of this statute, as he does the bald and confessedly bad Latin of Magna Charta, with a contemptuous came such at the moment when she " totally dissolved " the former government, and in establishing a new form of government for herself, thereby announcing her absolute independence. All these acts were done he/ore the fourth day of July, 1776. Bj these acts she then became free, sovereign, and independent ; and from the bottom of my heart do I unite with the President in the fervent prayer, " May the great Ruler of Nations grant that the signal blessings with which he has favoured us, may not, by the madness of party or personal ambition, be disregarded and lost." But what is this ideal being of which every Virginian then aoknowledged, and every Virginian still acknowledges, himself to be a liege, and which we have called " The Commonwealth of Virginia." It is the People of Virginia. The members of that established society within this " Ancient Dominion," who renouncing all allegiance to a former Sovereign, incoi'poratcd themselves into a body politic, chose to bestow upon themselves this new Coi'porate name, in order to preserve and perpetuate the succession of the sovereign rights which they had then assumed. — Most of these patriots have sunk into the tomb, and the few who remain must follow tliem ere long ; but long after the last of them shall be no more, that body politic and corporate styled " the Commonwealth of Virginia," will, by the blessing of God, still live ; and while it does live, this name will denote the People of Virginia of any other day, as expressively and as justly as it did those by whom the name was first assumed. — That Commonwealth yet lives, and remains as sovereign now as then, unless it has done or suffered some act in the interim, to abrogate its powers or annul its rights.

The people of Virginia, in shaking off their former allegiance, establishing a new form of government for themselves, and so assuming sovereignty and independence, did no more than was

sneer ; but let him remember, that it is not to learning, but to knowledge, wie are indebted for our Liberty. Let him also remember, that in Virginia, we do not value highly that pedantry, which would amend the provisions of old instruments for the mere purpose of making their style more smooth, grammatical, or classical. Those who re-enacted this statute on the 28th of January, 1819, copied the rough parts of it from the old act of 1776, which was believed to be an accurate paraphrase of a very old English statute, written, I believe, in the Norman French.

done, sooner or later, by eacli and every one of the thirteen revolted Colonies of Great Britain.

Each of these, like Virginia, became, in virtue of such acts, that free, sovereign, and independent body politic called a State; and becoming such, it took upon itself any corporate name it cliose to adopt. But as all the governments then established were Representative Democracies, this coi-porate name, whether it was the Commonwealth or any other, was designed to denote the free people of that pre-existing and established society before known by the name of some of the revolted British Colonies.

If, then, we ask, who constituted at that time that great Corporation and Sovereign body politic which I have called The People, which is the Lord of all in these now United States, the answer is, not the People of all the revolted Colonies collectively, but the People of each of them respectively. All individuals, being members of anj' one of these separate, distinct, and independent masses, owed faith, and truth, and allegiance to that particular mass, which, under some selected corporate name, designed to distinguish it from all others, was then proclaimed as their only earthly sovereign.

Such were the People of these Colonies then. As individuals they were subjects, as a body politic and corporate they were the sovereign of these subjects.

Such sovereigns and such subjects these People have been ever since, and still are, unless (as I have said before) they have done or sufiered some act, during the interval of time which has elapsed since they took upon themselves these characters, to change this, their moral and political condition. Have they done so ? This 18 the question which I propose to examine in my next Number.

III

The People of eacli of tLe several revolted Colonies of Great Britain, having become free, sovereign, and independent States, in the manner stated in mj last number, must necessarily contitme to be such Sovereigns now, unless they have done or suffered some act, since this their Sovereignty was assumed, whereby its rights and powers have been annulled. Have they done or suffered any such act ?

This is the question, which, iu my last number, I proposed to examine in this. But a reperusal of the Proclamati(m of the President, since this promise was made, having shewn me, what 1 had not befoi'e observed, tiiat doubts are therein cast upon the truth of my proposition which asserted the primitive sovereignly of the several States, although this is often admitted, by necessary implication, at least, in many other parts of this very instrument itself, I think it right to endeavor to remove all these doubts before I proceed further in the execution of the task I have undertaken.

During the various discussions, which the agitation of the questions as to the extent of the legitimate powers of the present government of the United States called forth, in former days, this asserted original sovereignty of the States was admitted and claimed by both sides, and was made the very basis of all the arguments of Federalists and Democrats respectively.

To these discussions, there was then brought, by either party, as much of zeal, of industry, of wisdom, and of laborious research, as have ever been manifested in this country, before or since ; and the discussions were conducted, on either hand, by many of the Patriots of the Revolution, who were familiar with all its events, because they had been actors and advisers in that great scene ab initio.

Nay, it nsed to be then contended, "by either party, that the jealous retainer by the States of their primitive rights of sovereignty, had caused the necessity for the tl)en new Federal Constitution.

But, like Moliere's mock doctor, " nous avons change tout cela," and the new College of Politicians, having younger, and of course wiser heads, have of late discovered, that all this was a mistake. The fashionable doctrine of the present day seems to be, that these States never were Sovereign ^ that there was, from the beginning, some great Central Sovereign power, abiding somewhere else than in the several States, of which they M-ere subjects, and all their people lieges. In illustration of this new doctrine, the Proclamation says, that " in our colonial state, although dependent upon another power, w^e very early considered ourselves as connected by common interest with each other. — Leagues were formed foi* common defence ; and before the Declaration of Independence, we were known in our aggregate character as The United Colonies of America. That decisive and important step was taken jointly. We declared ourselves a nation by a joint, not by several acts."

The exceeding caution in which this passage is penned, its intended assertions of doctrine, while seeming to narrate facts, merely, and the opening it obviously and designedly leaves, for escape from these doctrines, under the fog and smoke of verbal criticism, should the doctrines be thereafter controverted, may perhaps excite the admiration of minds trained or training in the mazes of diplomacy.

But when found in a State paper, uttered by the Chief Magistrate, and announced by him, as being intended for the edification and instruction of those to whom it is addressed, it can never meet the approbation of the candid and ingenuous.

Its obvious purpose is to assert, as a political dogma, that the revolted Colonies became one Sovereign Nation, before they severally assumed sovereignty upon themselves as individual States; and so to prove, that the States never were sovereign. But as this new doctrine was in direct conflict with all our past opinions, and in seeming opposition to much of our past histoi-y, it would not do to bUut it in the public face at once, as doctrine, therefore

PROCLAMATIOlSr OF PKESIDEl^T JACKSOIST. 23

it 18 presented seeming-ly as a simple fact. Nay, it is not exhibited as a substantive fact, but in the modest guise of a mere iuference from other facts. These other facts, too, are asserted in selected teruis of such broad and general signification, that it is difficult to fix their pi-ecise meaning. If, seeing the necessary tendency and eifect of the doctrine designed to be put forth in this passage, any one denies its truth, such may be innnediately met by the assertion, that it is not stated as doctrine, but as historical fact merely. If it be denied as such a fact, it may be immediately said, that it is not asserted as a substantive fact, but only as one inferi-ed from others previously stated. If the correctness of this inference is questioned, then commences a discussion as to the true meaning of the words employed to state the facts from which the inference is made ; and this discussion, if it convicts the author of error, will also furnish him with an excuse for saying, that he is no scholar, not skilled in "metaphysical subtlety," and therefore, may have used terms inappropriate to convey, accurately, his own meaning, which, however, is precisely j^ours. But if the true signification of the words employed in this apparent and simple narrative, is once admitted to be that in which they are obviously used, and if the facts themselves, so told, are conceded, then no logical mind can escape from the conclusion derived from such facts, and the purpose of this argument, which is to dispi'ove the original sovereign rights of the States, is fully attained.

The ingenuity of an argument thus constructed, undoulitedly has merit, but it is not such merit as ingenuous candour can ever claim. It imposes upon all who may deny its conclusion, the laborious task of unravelling a long tissue of supposed erroi's, and when they have done so, it exposes them to the sneer of having laboured to disprove what, it will then be said, was never affirmed.

On the other hand, if they pass by such things unnoticed, thej immediately fall into the snare laid for them, from which they cannot then easily extricate themselves. — For one, I greatly prefer to undertake the labour, and to subject myself to the sneer, than to incur the other hazard. Therefore, I will bring the whole of this narrative and argumentative pas3:ige to the test of a strict analysis. Its importance justifies, its art requires this.

24 A REVIEW OF THE i

The object of this ar<^unient, (confessed in its conclusion,) is tc prove that the People of some of tliese now United States, while in their colonial state, declared themselves to be a Nation, bv the Declaration of Independence made in 1Y76, under which tliey became '' One People." The necessary and inevitable result of this would be, that the People having once resolved themselves into one Nation, could not thereafter create themselves into separate and independent sovereignties, otherwise than by Ibrce, or by common consent.

But as no one has presumed, as yet at least, to establish, or to attempt to establish sov^eieignty here, by foice ; and as there exists not the slightest memorial of any common consent on the part of this supposed Nation, to its own dismemberment, therefore the sovereignty of the States never could have existed. The author of this Proclamation, does not seem to have been aware of the fact, which I stated in my last number, that before the declaration of Independence in July 1770, the People of Virginia certainly, and of several of the other Colonies, I believe, had severally announced their own sovereignty and independence, in totally dissolving their former government, and ordaining new governments for themselves respectively. But if such a fact had been known to him, it would not have changed the intended effect of his conclusion ; because, as this new Nation is said to have been created by the People, a part of which People the creators of State sovereignties wer:, their last act would of course have abrogated and animlled their first, and so put an end to the sovereignty which tiny had created but a short time before. So that the Sovereignty of all the States which had declared themselves sovereign before the declaration of Independence in July 1776, is as certainly annulled, as the existence of the sovereignty of those States v.ho had not then declared it, is prevented, by the mere as- Berti(jn of this simple fact of our existence as one nation, if that fact was true. A matter so important in its consequences ought not, and would not be conceded, to the mere say-so of any man, although that man might be the President; therefore, it became indispensably necessary, that he should prove it. Hence the attempt to do so. — Let me now examine what these proofs are.