Rogue State by Richard H. Owens Page B

that it is mere abuse, nothing less than attempted secession , hardly veiled under the flimsy forms of law. Fortunately, however, even that flimsy veil foes not cover the substantial wrong. I think I have already shown that under either construction of the clause of the Constitution above cited, the forms of the Constitution have not been fulfilled. The bill was introduced and has been thus far pushed forward towards its completion, under the erroneous idea that it was in verbal and technical conformity to the Constitution, and therefore, and only therefore, that it could ever ripen into a binding law. (Author’s italics).
    That was its only foundation; for I think that no reflecting man will seriously affirm that the legislature of Virginia, which, at Wheeling, on the 13th of May, 1862, gave its consent (not the consent of Virginia) to the dismemberment of the Old Commonwealth, was in truth and honesty, such legislature of Virginia as the Constitution speaks of - a legislature representing and governing the whole, and therefore honestly and lawfully speaking for the whole , in a matter which concerns the fundamental conditions of the State, and its organic law. (Author’s italics).
    In proceeding to answer the second question - “Is the said act expedient?” - it becomes necessary to look into the bill itself. It is a strange composition, bearing upon its face, unmistakable marks of haste and in consideration. The preamble, after various recitals, gives the consent of Congress, “that the forty-eight [sic] counties (which may be formed into a separate and independent state).”
    The first section declares “that the State of West Virginia be, and is hereby declared to be one of the United States of America, and admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States, in all respects whatever,” and allows three representatives, until the next general census. But this [is] immediately followed by a provision, “That this act shall not take effect until after the proclamation of the President of the United States hereinafter provided for.” Which proclamation, very possibly, may never happen, for there is no after-provision in the bill, making it the duty of the President to issue it.
    Then follows a paragraph (which seems to be only a preamble to § 2) to the effect that “it being represented to Congress that, since the convention of the 26th of November, 1861, which framed the proposed Constitution for the said State of West Virginia, the people thereof have expressed a wish to change the seventh section of the eleventh article of said Constitution by striking out the same and inserting the following” - giving the exact form of what Congress chooses to have inserted in the State Constitution!
    The bill does not inform us when, how, or by whom it was “represented to Congress,” that the People wished to change their Constitution so recently made by their convention, and ratified by their own votes, as stated with exact particularity in the preamble.
    If the people of West Virginia had a right to call a convention and make a Constitution for themselves, what is to hinder them from amending the one or making another by the same means and without waiting for Congress to instruct them what to do and how to do it? It looks hardly. However pure the motive, it lays Congress open to the suspicion of assuming unconstitutional powers, by dictating to a State, in a matter so important and so enduring as its Constitution.
    And the second section brings no relief, but strengthens the suspicion and magnifies the evil. “Therefore, Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That whenever the people of West Virginia shall, through their said convention, and by a vote,” etc. “make and ratify the change aforesaid, and properly certify” etc. “it shall be lawful for the President of the United States to issue his proclamation stating the fact, and thereupon this