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.
Sorry to hear you are offended by the truth about the Marxists. The Marxists chose their side then just as they do today. You see the communist party endorsed Obama and the communists in this country vote democrat (today's liberal party) because, although not communist, it provides the best chance of furthering their goals in the end. So it was with the Marxists in the republican party of the 1850s, 60s, and 70s. Communists naturally gravitate towards liberal parties. Of course most republicans of that day were not communists, just like most democrats of today aren't, but the fact that the communists saw the republican party of that time as party that would help further some of their goals says a lot about the early Republican party.