By the aid of such a power, skilfully em-
ployed, yon may ' bridge your way ' over the
Hellespont that separates State legislation
from that of Congress.; and you may do so
for pretty much the same purpose with which
Xerxes once bridged his way across the
Hellespont, that separates Asia from Europe.
He did so, in the language of Milton, ' the
liberties of Greece to yoke.' You may do so
for the analogous purpose of subjugating and
reducing the sovereignties of States, as your
taste or convenience may suggest and fash-
ioning them to your imperial will."
Now, sir, it seems to me that the view taken
of this question by this distinguished Mary-
lander, comes home to our minds to-day with
additional force, and that before we adopt a
measure which entirely breaks down those
guards which our fathers erected around us
as a sovereign State of this Union, we should
consider well the times in which we live and
the circumstances by which we are surround-
ed. I saw the other day that a proposi-
tion, which I think bears practically upon
this question, was advocated by one in high
place here in Maryland, by one who repre-
sents this State in the Congress of the United
States, it was a proposition touching upon
this very question of States' rights; a propo-
sition before Congress to prohibit the State
of Maryland from taxing the holders of bonds
of the United States within her limits. That
proposition in Congress was advocated by
this representative of Maryland, at the head
of this consolidation party in power; and
advocated upon the ground that the State of
Maryland bad no right, if the Congress of
the United States undertook to assume a
power of that character, to write upon her
statute books a law in contravention of it
If the law had been passed as advocated by
him, it would have been in direct opposition
to this article of your bill of rights, which
says that the State of Maryland has the right
to regulate her own internal polity in her
own way. It would be striking at. one of the
dearest rights of the State; the right to tax
the property of her own citizens. And when
we hear these doctrines advocated in this
State, when we find them coming from every
quarter of our land, it becomes us to be care
ful and cautious before we undertake to lay
at the feet of this theory of the paramount
authority of the National Government, every
safeguard and protection which the State of
Maryland holds over her liberties. Now
sir, not one word has been adduced by these
gentlemen upon the floor who advocate this
doctrine of paramount allegiance, in its favor
It is a doctrine so clear that no man can dispute
that the State of Maryland is deeply
concerned in it, for if this article is adopted, it
leaves it to the Government of the United
States to pass any law, no matter of what
character, and your bill of rights will say that
it is the overriding law of the land, and you |
are bound to bow and submit to it without
any right of protection on the part of the
State against any edict which may be issued
by the Government at Washington.
As I said before, I do not intend to go into
a thorough discussion of this question. I
simply desire to present these views to the
Convention and ask them to consider this
question before they vote in favor of it, and
to hear what reasons may be given by gen-
tlemen on the other side to induce them to
come to so grave a conclusion.
Mr. SANDS. It was my purpose, Mr. Presi-
dent, not to have addressed this Convention
upon the subject embraced in this article.
But I cannot consent to sit still here and lis-
ten to doctrines promulgated In this ball, and
promulgated with all the tones they would
be promulgated with if they were original,—
doctrines from which sprung all our present
woes. And how in the light of present events,
gentlemen can spend hours here in reassert-
ing principles which have been asserted be-
fore, through the life of such men as Cal-
houn, Barnwell, Rhett, Orr, Jeff. Davis and
others of the extreme States' rights school—
how they can reproduce them in the face of
the events of this day, when it is potent that
those doctrines have borne but their own
legitimate, bitter, ashen fruit in civil war,
rapine and bloodshed, I cannot for the life
of me understand.
Mr. CLARKE. Will the gentleman allow
me one moment?
Mr. SANDS. The gentleman will have an
opportunity to reply to me.
The PRESIDENT. The gentleman must not
be interrupted when speaking.
Mr. CLARKE. The gentleman interrupted
me yesterday. I wanted to ask him but a
single question.
Mr. SANDS. The gentleman had a whole
day for his speech; I have but one hour. I
say that, in the face of the fact that those
men have committed those doctrines to the
terrible arbitrament of war. when the battle
may be raging at this very instant, bowmen
can broach those doctrines here, is what I
cannot understand.
My friend from Calvert (Mr. Briscoe) said
that he had not heard a word from the ma-
jority here in advocacy of the doctrine that
the Government of the United States was
supreme, or, in the language of this article,
paramount. Now, I would simply advise
gentlemen here to pursue a course of reading
which is familiar to most men, and which I
think will fully enlighten them upon this point.
Is it a doctrine proclaimed here the first time
that we are a nation, that we are an empire ?
Now, I do not mean to talk merely. I would
rather refer gentlemen to some books. And
just upon that point I beg leave to refer them
to that very obsolete old document, the fare-
well address of George Washington. I pro-
pose, with the permission of the House, to |
