American politics (non-partisan) from the beginning to date : $b embodying a history of all the political parties, with their views and records on all important questions. Great speeches on all great issues, and tabulated history and chronological events.Cooper, Thomas V. (Thomas Valentine)
History
American politics (non-partisan) from the beginning to date : $b embodying a history of all the political parties, with their views and records on all important questions. Great speeches on all great issues, and tabulated history and chronological events.
Cooper, Thomas V. (Thomas Valentine)
Political parties -- United States; United States -- Politics and government
“I have purposely confined my remarks to revolutionary resistance,
because it has been claimed within the last few years that any State,
whenever this shall be its sovereign will and pleasure, may secede from
the Union in accordance with the Constitution, and without any violation
of the constitutional rights of the other members of the Confederacy.
That as each became parties to the Union by the vote of its own people
assembled in convention, so any one of them may retire from the Union in
a similar manner by the vote of such a convention.
“In order to justify secession as a constitutional remedy, it must be on
the principle that the Federal Government is a mere voluntary
association of States, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the
contracting parties. If this be so, the Confederacy is a rope of sand,
to be penetrated and dissolved by the first adverse wave of public
opinion in any of the States. In this manner our thirty-three States may
resolve themselves into as many petty, jarring, and hostile republics,
each one retiring from the Union without responsibility whenever any
sudden excitement might impel them to such a course. By this process a
Union might be entirely broken into fragments in a few weeks, which cost
our forefathers many years of toil, privation, and blood to establish.
“Such a principle is wholly inconsistent with the history as well as the
character of the Federal Constitution. After it was framed with the
greatest deliberation and care, it was submitted to conventions of the
people of the several States for ratification. Its provisions were
discussed at length in these bodies, composed of the first men of the
country. Its opponents contended that it conferred powers upon the
Federal Government dangerous to the rights of the States, whilst its
advocates maintained that, under a fair construction of the instrument,
there was no foundation for such apprehensions. In that mighty struggle
between the first intellects of this or any other country, it never
occurred to any individual, either among its opponents or advocates, to
assert or even to intimate that their efforts were all vain labor,
because the moment that any State felt herself aggrieved she might
secede from the Union. What a crushing argument would this have proved
against those who dreaded that the rights of the States would be
endangered by the Constitution. The truth is, that it was not until some
years after the origin of the Federal Government that such a proposition
was first advanced. It was afterwards met and refuted by the conclusive
arguments of General Jackson, who, in his message of the 16th of
January, 1833, transmitting the nullifying ordinance of South Carolina
to Congress, employs the following language: ‘The right of the people of
a single State to absolve themselves at will and without the consent of
the other States from their most solemn obligations, and hazard the
liberty and happiness of the millions composing this Union, cannot be
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account