Nullification, Secession, Webster's Argument, and the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions: Considered in Reference to the Constitution and Historically — John Shaqi
Nullification, Secession, Webster's Argument, and the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions: Considered in Reference to the Constitution and HistoricallyLoring, Caleb William
History
Nullification, Secession, Webster's Argument, and the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions: Considered in Reference to the Constitution and Historically
Loring, Caleb William
Nullification (States' rights); Secession
“I have myself seen that most distinguished man, Charles
Francis Adams, subjected in society to treatment which, if he
had resented it, might have seriously imperilled the relations
of the two countries.... But in this critical state of things,
in and out of Parliament, Mr. Disraeli and Sir Stafford
Northcote on one side, and the Duke of Argyll and Sir George
Cornewall Lewis on the other, mainly contributed to keep this
country neutral, and to save us from the serious mistake of
taking part with the South.”
Even Mr. Bryce, a most learned author, whose opinion in this matter has
great weight, intimates that the seceding States legally may have been
right.[1]
[1] Bryce’s _American Commonwealth_, vol. i., pages 409 and _seq._ Yet
Mr. Bryce’s whole work is in accordance with the theory he asserts at
the beginning of chapter iv., vol. i., page 29: “The acceptance of the
Constitution of 1789 made the American people a nation. It turned what
had been a league of States into a Federal State by giving it a
National Government with a direct authority over all citizens.”
Lord Wolseley, in his article in _Macmillan’s Magazine_ on the life of
Lee, extolling him as the greatest general of his age and the most
perfect man,[2] informs us that each State possessed the right both
historically and legally under the Constitution to leave the Union at
its will. Apparently he did not know that January 23, 1861, Lee wrote to
his son: “Secession is nothing but revolution.” “It” (the Constitution)
“is intended for perpetual union, so expressed in the preamble, and for
the establishment of a government not a compact, and which can only be
dissolved by revolution or the assent of all the people in convention
assembled. It is idle to talk of secession.”[2]
[2] General Long’s _Memoirs of Lee_, page 88.
Possibly in time the North may be of the same opinion as to Lee’s
transcendent ability as a general. No one doubts now his great soldierly
attainments and the worth of his private character, but for the sake of
the existence of our nation, may it never believe he fought for the
right.
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