In response to the Alien and sedition acts passed under Adams, Thomas Jefferson, while sitting as Vice President of the United States in 1799, wrote to James Madison of his conviction in "a reservation of th[ose] rights resulting to us from these palpable violations [the Alien and Sedition Acts]" and, if the federal government did not return to "the true principles of our federal compact", [he was determined to] "sever ourselves from that union we so much value, rather than give up the rights of self government which we have reserved, and in which alone we see liberty, safety and happiness."
Jefferson also said that "if any State in the Union will declare that it prefers separation with the first alternative to a continuance in Union without it, I have no hesitation in saying 'let us separate.'" (1816)
Madison said that "the use of force against a state [in order to keep it in the Union] would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound."
John Quincy Adams: "the indissoluble link of union between the people of the several States of this confederated nation is, after all, not in the right, but in the heart. If the day should ever come (may Heaven avert it) when the affections of the people of these States shall be alienated from each other; when the fraternal spirit shall give way to cold indifference, or collision of interest shall fester into hatred, the bands of political association will not long hold together parties no longer attracted by the magnetism of conciliated interests and kindly sympathies; and far better will it be for the people of the disunited States to part in friendship from each other, than to be held together by constraint."
Alexander Hamilton said “to coerce the states is one of the maddest projects that was ever devised. Can any reasonable man be well-disposed towards a government which makes war and carnage the only means of supporting itself that can only exist by the sword?" (constitutional convention
Lincoln even agree on this, before he did and Mitt Romney style flip flop and changed his mind: "Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable,-- most sacred right--a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the territory as they inhabit."
De Toqueville also noted that “By uniting together, they have not forfeited their nationality nor been reduced to a condition of one and the same people.” He went on to say that “if one of the states chooses to withdraw from the compact, it will be difficult to disprove their right of doing so, and the federal government would have no means of maintaining its claims either directly or by force.”
By the way I love how you conveniently glossed over the issue of the Marxists again. So you say they joined the republican party because they cared about slavery? Please remember that communists may claim to care about things like liberty but they really seek the opposite. Communism is opposite world where war is peace, freedom is slavery and lies are truth. They really joined the Republican party because they saw that it tended more to big government, higher taxes, nationalization and getting the Fed government involved in "internal improvements".
Good post.
It’s interesting that the opinions of Madison and Adams regarding secession both evolved - and in opposite directions. Adams opposed entertainment of secession when northern interests hinted at it. And then reversed himself and appeared to hedge his bet when it came to the annexation of Texas.
Madison also said, “...I do not consider the proceedings of Virginia in ’98-’99 as countenancing the doctrine that a state may at will secede from its Constitutional compact with the other States. A rightful secession requires the consent of the others, or an abuse of the compact, absolving the seceding party from the obligations imposed by it.” — James Madison to Alexander Rives, 1832
“I return my thanks for the copy of your late very powerful Speech in the Senate of the United S. It crushes “nullification” and must hasten the abandonment of “Secession.” But this dodges the blow by confounding the claim to secede at will, with the right of seceding from intolerable oppression. The former answers itself, being a violation, without cause, of a faith solemnly pledged. The latter is another name only for revolution, about which there is no theoretic controversy.” — James Madison to Daniel Webster, 1833
“The conduct of S. Carolina has called forth not only the question of nullification, but the more formidable one of secession. It is asked whether a State by resuming the sovereign form in which it entered the Union, may not of right withdraw from it at will. As this is a simple question whether a State, more than an individual, has a right to violate its engagements, it would seem that it might be safely left to answer itself. But the countenance given to the claim shows that it cannot be so lightly dismissed. The natural feelings which laudably attach the people composing a State, to its authority and importance, are at present too much excited by the unnatural feelings, with which they have been inspired against their brethren of other States, not to expose them, to the danger of being misled into erroneous views of the nature of the Union and the interest they have in it. One thing at least seems to be too clear to be questioned, that whilst a State remains within the Union it cannot withdraw its citizens from the operation of the Constitution & laws of the Union. In the event of an actual secession without the Consent of the Co States, the course to be pursued by these involves questions painful in the discussion of them. God grant that the menacing appearances, which obtruded it may not be followed by positive occurrences requiring the more painful task of deciding them?” — James Madison to William Rives, 1833
Hamilton was no advocate of secession. He implored John Trumbull to intercede in Aaron Burr’s agitation to secession:
“You are going to Boston. You will see the principal men there. Tell them from me, at my request, for God’s sake, to cease these conversations and threatenings about a separation of the Union. It must hang together as long as it can be made to.”
Your use of Lincoln’s quote is patently dishonest. Lincoln spoke in the same voice as the founders when he articulated the God-given right of rebellion when circumstances warranted it and the lack of viable alternatives dictated it. He wasn’t alluding to unilateral secession at pleasure.
The insinuation of republican/marxist “hearts of a feather” is stupid and offensive. You really should refrain from doing that.
The first thing we need to remember is: when the Alien & Sedition acts were first proposed in 1798, there was a genuine threat & fear of war with France, the proposed acts were considered legitimate, and were not opposed by Vice President Jefferson.
Only later, when the threat of war disappeared, and the acts no longer seemed necessary, did Jefferson see political advantage in opposing them.
Second, scour all the Founders' quotes you wish, but you will not find any which support secession "at pleasure".
Instead, all imply the existence of one or both of two conditions:
Indeed, when President Jefferson suspected his own Vice President, Aaron Burr, of plotting to have Louisiana secede, Jefferson sent troops to have Burr arrested and tried for treason!
So we know for certain what Jefferson believed about secession "at pleasure".
But in November 1860, when the Slave Power began organizing for secession, there was no mutual consent, and no material breech of contract, only the 100% constitutional election of "Black Republicans" and "Ape" Lincoln.
Yes, your quote from De Toqueville applies here -- so there was no war started by the Union against Confederates, no battles, no invasions, not one Confederate soldier killed, until, until,..
Until the Confederacy provoked war, started war, formally declared war on the United States, and sent its forces to support secessionists in Union states.
Bottom line: secession did not cause Civil War, nor did forming the Confederacy.
Civil War began because the Confederacy started & declared it, period.
Out of time, must go, back for more tomorrow...