Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama — John Shaqi
Civil War and Reconstruction in AlabamaFleming, Walter L. (Walter Lynwood)
History
Civil War and Reconstruction in Alabama
Fleming, Walter L. (Walter Lynwood)
Alabama -- History -- Civil War, 1861-1865; Reconstruction (U.S. history, 1865-1877) -- Alabama
The ordinance was called up. It was styled "An Ordinance to dissolve the
Union between Alabama and other States united under the Compact styled
'The Constitution of the United States of America.'" The preamble stated
that the election of Lincoln and Hamlin by a sectional party avowedly
hostile to the domestic institutions, peace, and security of Alabama,
preceded by many dangerous infractions of the Constitution by the states
and people of the North, was a political wrong of so insulting and
menacing a character as to justify the people of Alabama in the adoption
of prompt and decided measures for their future peace and security. The
ordinance simply stated that Alabama withdrew from the Union and that her
people resumed the powers delegated by the Constitution to the Federal
government. A coöperationist amendment expressed the desire of the people
to form with the other southern states a permanent government, and invited
a convention of the states to meet in Montgomery on February 4, 1861, for
consultation in regard to the common safety. The ordinance was passed by a
vote of 69 to 31, every delegate voting. Fifteen coöperationists voted for
secession and 22 signed the ordinance.
In the convention opinions varied as to whether peace or war would follow
secession. The great majority of the members, and of the people also,
believed that peaceful relations would continue. All truly wished for
peace. A number of the coöperationists expressed themselves as fearing
war, but this was when opposing secession, and they probably said more
than they really believed. Yet in nearly all the speeches made in the
convention there seemed to be distinguishable a feeling of fear and dread
lest war should follow. However, had war been a certainty, secession would
not have been delayed or checked.
There was warm discussion on the question of submitting the ordinance to
the people for ratification or rejection. The coöperationists, both before
and after the passage of the ordinance, favored its reference to the
people in the hope that the measure would be delayed or defeated. No one
expected that it would be referred to the people, but this was a good
question for obstructive purposes. The minority report on secession
declared that, in a matter of such vital importance, involving the lives
and liberties of a whole people, the ordinance should be submitted to them
for their discussion, and that secession should be attempted only after
ratification by a direct vote of the people on that single issue.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account