Jefferson's quote, and many others as well, clearly refers to what we today call a "material breech of contract".
So Madison's point remains valid: the Constitution does not authorize secession "at pleasure", meaning for no good reason.
JCBreckenridge: "Lincoln would still have defeated Douglas without the split.
Lincoln didn’t need to carry a single southern state to be elected."
The Democrat party dominated by Southerners outnumbered Republicans, and had held power in Washington almost continuously since the beginning of the Republic.
In 1856 Democrats won with 1.8 million votes while carrying the Northern states of Pennsylvania, Indiana, Illinois and California.
In 1860 a united enthusiastic Democrat party could easily have held the 1.8 million from 1856, added hundreds of thousands more in carrying some northern states, and making them victorious.
Many northerners cared nothing about slavery and were happy to vote for Democrats who promised to hold the Union together.
But Deep-South Fire-Eaters splitting the party demoralized and depressed Democrat voters, reducing their total in 1860 to just 1.6 million, and causing their defeat.
In 1860 the election of Lincoln was not a foregone certainty, it first required willing self-destruction by Democrats.
JCBreckenridge: "No, but the state legislatures did.
Their purpose is to safeguard the powers of their individual state from privation."
In November 1860, when secessionists began to organize, there was no actual threat, no breech of contract, no "oppression or usurpation" -- nothing except the constitutional election of a new president, who would not even take office for four more months.
So they declared their secession, in Madison's words, "at pleasure" which is not authorized by either the Constitution or our Founders stated Original Intent.
JCBreckenridge: "Like John Brown?"
There were dozens and dozens of seized Federal properties in every seceding state, beginning in December 1860 -- some even before formal declarations of secession.
These included Federal forts, arsenals, naval ships, customs/Court houses, mints & paymasters offices, light houses, and ordnance stores.
In some cases Federal officials were detained, in others threatened and in some fired on.
But in no case was there direct killing by one side's soldiers of the other's soldiers -- until after the Confederacy declared war on the United States, on May 6, 1861.
JCBreckenridge: "True, but southern civilians were killed by gunrunners.
The response of Buchanan was to recognise the south.
It was Lincoln who chose to go to war with the South.
I don't know about "gun runners" allegedly killing southern civilians, not clear what that might have to do with the lead-up to war.
Outgoing President Buchanan never officially recognized the secessionists.
He did not meet with them, did not negotiate with them.
What he did do was talk things over with various intermediaries, who passed on Buchanan's words to Confederate emissaries.
What Buchanan told them was: there could be no recognition, he would not give up Forts Sumter or Pickens.
He also ordered that Fort Sumter be resupplied, a January 1861 mission that was met with shore fire in Charlston Harbor, and had many Northerners calling for war even then.
Lincoln chose nothing more than to repeat on a larger scale President Buchanan's attempt to resupply Federal troops at Fort Sumter.
The results were official threats by secessionists to start a war, then actual Confederate military actions against the fort, and on May 6, 1861 an official Confederate Declaration of War against the United States.
JCBreckenridge: "Within it’s borders?
That doesn’t sound like aggression to me."
Whenever you seize by force property which is not yours, that's aggression, FRiend.
JCBreckenridge: "Nonsense.
The first time that confederate forces crossed into Union territory was at Gettysburg.
Prior to this, every battle had been on Confederate territory."
You obviously know very little about the actual Civil War.
Every state or territory bordering the Confederacy, and some quite distant, was invaded by Confederate forces, some multiple times.
In a previous thread I took the time to look them up, and posted them, but today am away from home and don't have my reference handy -- Maryland, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, Oklahoma, Kansas, New Mexico, Arizona and Colorado all saw at least some Civil War battles, with Maryland and Pennsylvania suffering the worst of it.
Pennsylvania was invaded three different times -- in 1862, 1863 and 1864 or which Gettysburg was only the largest.
JCBreckenridge: "If the South were the invaders, why is it that the North was the first to invade?"
You forget what was going on all through 1861.
The Confederacy was on the march, beginning in South Carolina it grew from one state to seven, declared war on the United States and grew to 11 states, all the while seizing every Federal property it could.
It then sent forces into the Border states of Maryland (1862), West Virginia (1861 on), Kentucky (1861), Missouri (1861) and Oklahoma (1861), both to encourage their secession, and to seize as many militarily useful supplies as possible.
In the beginning of 1861 the Confederacy was the only aggressor, throughout most of 1861 was more aggressive, and its first major battle, at Manassas (Bull Run) was a clear Southern victory.
In short, the Confederacy was ready to fight a lot sooner than the North, and the result much of the war in 1861 started on Union property or territory before Confederates were driven back.
JCBreckenridge: "So now you’re whitewashing Confederate casulties due to the scorched earth campaign.
If they were sincerely ‘friends’, why did Sheridan devastate the Shenandoah, and Sherman torch Atlanta?
That doesn’t sound like ‘friends’ to me.
That sounds like an occupation."
I said nothing about "friends", where did that come from?
I merely said that enumerated civilian deaths in the US Civil War were a mere handful, minuscule compared to the tens of millions killed in, for example, WWII.
No one denies that civilians suffered deprivations, but there was no Civil War equivalent to, for example, the Soviets' rape and destruction of Eastern Germany in 1945.
“the Constitution does not authorize secession “at pleasure”, meaning for no good reason.”
And neither was the secession of the south ‘at pleasure’. They argued, and with due reason, that the federal government had overstepped their bounds. Sure, they lost, but the cost of such proved their case.
“In 1860 a united enthusiastic Democrat party could easily have held the 1.8 million from 1856, added hundreds of thousands more in carrying some northern states, and making them victorious.”
The Democrat party wasn’t divided in the North in the 1860 election - only Douglas ran. Lincoln won an absolute majority in every Northern state. The only two states that he could have lost were CA (4 ECs) and OR (3 ECs). That would turn Lincoln’s 180- 123 into 172 - 130.
“Many northerners cared nothing about slavery and were happy to vote for Democrats who promised to hold the Union together.”
Many northerners supported slavery. Lincoln was elected on a majority with only 39 percent of the vote.
“But Deep-South Fire-Eaters splitting the party demoralized and depressed Democrat voters, reducing their total in 1860 to just 1.6 million, and causing their defeat.”
Democrat voters altogether were 2.7 million in 1860. Their turnout wasn’t depressed, it increased. If you include Democrat + Southern Democrat only and no Bell, that’s still 2.1 million.
“In 1860 the election of Lincoln was not a foregone certainty.”
Insofar as Lincoln only needed the support of the North, yes, it was a foregone conclusion.
“In November 1860, when secessionists began to organize, there was no actual threat, no breech of contract, no “oppression or usurpation” — nothing except the constitutional election of a new president, who would not even take office for four more months.”
Had Lincoln been willing to seek a peaceful resolution as Buchanan tried, secession would not have occurred. Lincoln was willing to use force to override the constitutional issues. This is the mandate that he received from the North.
Do you really believe that the man elected by just 39 percent of those who voted represented the republic?
“There were dozens and dozens of seized Federal properties in every seceding state”
You said every state, not every seceding state. If the property was bought, paid for and maintained by the state, then it’s not exactly federal property anymore is it?
Did the North compensate the South for the property in the North that they took with them that the South helped pay for?
“In some cases Federal officials were detained, in others threatened and in some fired on.”
And what of the North? Did they compensate the South for their contribution to the northern fortifications?
“But in no case was there direct killing by one side’s soldiers of the other’s soldiers”
But there were Southern Civilians killed by northern gun runners, like John Brown.
“The response of Buchanan was to recognise the south.
It was Lincoln who chose to go to war with the South.”
Exactly - there was no cause to go to war, except from Lincoln.
“I don’t know about “gun runners” allegedly killing southern civilians, not clear what that might have to do with the lead-up to war.”
Then you’d best read some actual history of the war. John Brown ran guns - that is what he was paid to do.
Look up the Pottowatomie Massacre. He had already been convicted of Massacring civilians in Kansas.
Then he raided Harpers Ferry in 1859. With Northern guns bought and sold for that purpose. He killed 5 civilians.
“What he did do was talk things over with various intermediaries, who passed on Buchanan’s words to Confederate emissaries.”
What he did not do, is declare war on them. Why not? Because he hoped for a peaceful solution to the whole affair. Even after Lincoln began his invasion of the South, he was negotiating trying to avert the ultimate tragedy of brother killing brother. He failed. Lincoln ‘succeeded’ if it can be called a ‘success’ in subduing the South, but at a cost to constitutional governance and the rights of the states.
“He also ordered that Fort Sumter be resupplied, a January 1861 mission that was met with shore fire in Charlston Harbor, and had many Northerners calling for war even then.”
Given that the fort was no longer in his territory, this amounted to war.
“Lincoln chose nothing more than to repeat on a larger scale President Buchanan’s attempt to resupply Federal troops at Fort Sumter.”
Knowing full well, that the breach of Southern borders would trigger war.
“Confederate Declaration of War against the United States.”
Which occurred after Lincoln sent troops to the fort. Had Lincoln simply surrendered the fort, he could have averted the war.
“Whenever you seize by force property which is not yours, that’s aggression, FRiend.”
Oh, that’s not the case. If the north believed that seizing property was wrong, why did they seize the property of the south and devastate the Shenandoah and burn Atlanta? If they fought for the protection of property, they certainly forgot that was the case.
“You obviously know very little about the actual Civil War.”
How many battles were fought in Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, and New York? None.
The territory of the confederacy and the border states includes Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and New Mexico.
Show me a battle that was fought in Illinois, Ohio, Indiana or New York and I’ll concede the point.
“In a previous thread I took the time to look them up, and posted them, but today am away from home and don’t have my reference handy”
Maryland (voted to secede, overridden by the President). Pennsylvania (Gettysburg, already mentioned), West Virginia (part of Virginia which voted to secede) Kentucky, (Magoffin chose to be neutral, not Union territory until after the union invaded at the start of the war. Missouri, (voted to secede, overriden) Oklahoma (southern state, voted to secede). Kansas (see Bleeding Kansas), disputed territory. New Mexico, (southern state), Arizona, (southern state. Colorado (not at state).
“Pennsylvania was invaded three different times — in 1862, 1863 and 1864 or which Gettysburg was only the largest.”
As opposed to Virginia which was under continuous occupation from 1861 - 1865, with no fewer than several hundred skirmishes and 2/3rds of all the major battles of the war.
Sounds like an occupation to me.
“The Confederacy was on the march, beginning in South Carolina it grew from one state to seven, declared war on the United States and grew to 11 states, all the while seizing every Federal property it could.
Did so peacefully, through the state legislatures. If the federal government felt threatened by peaceful secession, enough so to declare war, then they provoked the war, not the south.
“Maryland (1862), West Virginia (1861 on), Kentucky (1861), Missouri (1861) and Oklahoma (1861), both to encourage their secession, and to seize as many militarily useful supplies as possible.”
All states, or parts of states that actually voted for secession. Technically these were southern states and part of the confederacy. When the North sent troops in to quash the secessionists, they began the occupation of the south.
“In the beginning of 1861 the Confederacy was the only aggressor, throughout most of 1861 was more aggressive, and its first major battle, at Manassas (Bull Run) was a clear Southern victory.”
And where is Manassas? Manassas is in Virginia! How is it aggression to defend your territory from the invasion from the North. 1st Manassas was a Union invasion that was defeated. The whole point to 1st Manassas was to put a quick end to the war by massing troops and trying to storm Richmond. They failed.
“the Confederacy was ready to fight a lot sooner than the North, and the result much of the war in 1861 started on Union property”
Uh, no. The opening battle of the war was an invasion by the North of the South, in 1st Manassas, which is in Virginia. Look it up.
“No one denies that civilians suffered deprivations, but there was no Civil War equivalent to, for example, the Soviets’ rape and destruction of Eastern Germany in 1945.”
Civilian casulties were some 50k Southerners.
The distinguished Civil War historian James McPherson has estimated that there were 50,000 civilian deaths during the war, and has concluded that the overall mortality rate for the South exceeded that of any country in World War I and all but the region between the Rhine and the Volga in World War II.