the american republic-第36章
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！
language； manners； customs； and law。 All these； except the last； or common law； may exist without national unity in the modern political sense of the term nation。 The English common law was recognized by the colonial courts； and in force in all the colonies； not by virtue of colonial legislation； but by virtue of English authority； as expressed in English jurisprudence。 The colonists were under the Common Law； because they were Englishmen； and subjects of the English sovereign。 This proves that they were really one people with the English people； though existing in a state of colonial dependence； and not a separate people having nothing politically in common with them but in the accident of having the same royal person for their king。 The union with the mother country was national； not personal； as was the union existing between England and Hanover； or that still existing between the empire of Austria； formerly Germany； and the kingdom of Hungary； and hence the British parliament claimed； and not illegally； the right to tax the colonies for the support of the empire； and to bind them in all cases whatsoevera claim the colonies them… 212 selves admitted in principle by recognizing and observing the British navigation laws。 The people of the several colonies being really one people before independence； in the sovereignty of the mother country； must be so still； unless they have since； by some valid act； divided themselves or been divided into separate and independent states。
The king； say the jurists； never dies； and the heralds cry； 〃The king is dead！ Live the king！〃 Sovereignty never lapses； is never in abeyance； and the moment it ceases in one people it is renewed in another。 The British sovereignty ceased in the colonies with independence； and the American took its place。 Did the sovereignty； which before independence was in Great Britain； pass from Great Britain to the States severally； or to the States united？ It might have passed to them severally； but did it？ There is no question of law or antecedent right in the case； but a simple question of fact； and the fact is determined by determining who it was that assumed it； exercised it； and has continued to exercise it。 As to this there is no doubt。 The sovereignty as a fact has been assumed and exercised by the United States； the States united； and never by the States separately or severally。 Then as a fact the sover… 213 eignty that before independence was in Great Britain； passed； on independence to the States united； and reappears in all its vigor in the United States； the only successor to Great Britain known to or recognized by the civilized world。
As the colonial people were； though distributed in distinct colonies； still one people； the people of the United States； though distributed into distinct and mutually independent States； are yet one sovereign people； therefore a sovereign state or nation； and not a simple league or confederacy of nations。
There is no doubt that all the powers exercised by the General Government； though embracing all foreign relations and all general interests and relations of all the States； might have been exercised by it under the authority of a mutual compact of the several States； and practically the difference between the compact theory and the national view would be very little； unless in cases like that of secession。 On the supposition that the American people are one political people； the government would have the right to treat secession； in the sense in which the seceders understand it； as rebellion； and to suppress it by employing all the physical force at its command； but on the compact 214 theory it would have no such right。 But the question now under discussion turns simply on what has been and is the historical fact。 Before the States could enter into the compact and delegate sovereign powers to the Union； they must have severally possessed them。 It is historically certain that they did not possess them before independence； they did not obtain them by independence； for they did not severally succeed to the British sovereignty； to which they succeeded only as States united。 When； then； and by what means did they or could they become severally sovereign States？ The United States having succeeded to the British sovereignty in the Anglo…American colonies； they came into possession of full national sovereignty； and have alone held and exercised it ever since independence became a fact。 The States severally succeeding only to the colonies； never held； and have never been competent to delegate sovereign powers。
The old Articles of Confederation； it is conceded； were framed on the assumption that the States are severally sovereign； but the several States； at the same time； were regarded as forming one nation； and； though divided into separate States； the people were regarded as one people。 The Legislature of New York； as 216 early as 1782； calls for an essential change In the Articles of Confederation； as proved to be inadequate to secure the peace； security； and prosperity of 〃the nation。〃 All the proceedings that preceded and led to the call of the convention of 1781 were based on the assumption that the people of the United States were one people。 The States were called united； not confederated States； even in the very Articles of Confederation themselves； and officially the United States were called 〃the Union。〃 That the united colonies by independence became united States； and formed really one and only one people； was in the thought； the belief； the instinct of the great mass of the people。 They acted as they existed through State as they had previously acted through colonial organization； for in throwing off the British authority there was no other organization through which they could act。 The States； or people of the States； severally sent their delegates to the Congress of the United States； and these delegates adopted the rule of voting in Congress by States； a rule that might be revived without detriment to national unity。 Nothing was more natural； then； than that Congress； composed of delegates elected or appointed by States； should draw up articles of confederation 216 rather than articles of union； in order； if for no other reason； to conciliate the smaller States； and to prevent their jealousy of the larger States such as Virginia； Massachusetts； and Pennsylvania。
Moreover； the Articles of Confederation were drawn up and adopted during the transition from colonial dependence to national independence。 Independence was declared in 1776； but it was not a fact till l782； when the preliminary treaty acknowledging it was signed at Paris。 Till then the United States were not an independent nation； they were only a people struggling to become an independent nation。 Prior to that preliminary treaty； neither the Union nor the States severally were sovereign。 The articles were agreed on in Congress in 1777； but they were not ratified by all the States till May； 1781； and in 1782 the movement was commenced in the Legislature of New York for their amendment。 Till the organization under the constitution ordained by the people of the United States in l787； and which went into operation in 1789； the United States had in reality only a provisional government； and it was not till then that the national government was definitively organized； and the line of demarcation between the General Gov… 217 ernment and the particular State governments was fixed。
The Confederation was an acknowledged failure； and was rejected by the American people； precisely because it was not in harmony with the unwritten or Providential constitution of the nation； and it was not in harmony with that constitution precisely because it recognized the States as severally sovereign； and substituted confederation for union。 The failure of confederation and the success of union are ample proofs of th
