Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
I think it was the British who wanted the 13 states named in the treaty because they had some doubts as to whether the United States would stay together as one country.

When New York was still debating whether to ratify the Constitution, some of them thought they could ratify it conditionally (depending on whether a Bill of Rights was added)--James Madison wrote a letter to a New Yorker saying that once you ratify, you can't secede. I think the first time South Carolina threatened to secede was about a week after Congress met for the first time in 1789.

22 posted on 06/29/2023 4:51:27 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Verginius Rufus
I think it was the British who wanted the 13 states named in the treaty because they had some doubts as to whether the United States would stay together as one country.

That is some interesting insight. It makes sense. They almost didn't. Massachusetts and Connecticut were talking about seceding in 1814 at the Hartford Convention.

When New York was still debating whether to ratify the Constitution, some of them thought they could ratify it conditionally (depending on whether a Bill of Rights was added)--James Madison wrote a letter to a New Yorker saying that once you ratify, you can't secede.

That's funny, because James Madison was one of the men who approved the ratification statement from Virginia which said you *COULD* secede. If he didn't agree, he should have said so at the time.

I think the first time South Carolina threatened to secede was about a week after Congress met for the first time in 1789.

My recollection of history is that the South wasn't all that big on joining the "revolution" until after Francis Marion made them hate the British.

29 posted on 06/29/2023 4:56:31 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: Verginius Rufus

It wasn’t the British who insisted each state be recognized as sovereign by name in the Treaty of Paris. It was the representatives of the States themselves who insisted on that.

I have never heard of Madison writing any letter to New York saying that once a state ratifies it cannot secede. This goes against the whole tone and tenor of the Federalist Papers. It also goes against what Hamilton said to the New York Assembly when it was brought up that the federal government might become overmighty: ““To coerce the states is one of the maddest projects that was ever devised. Can any reasonable man be well disposed toward a government which makes war and carnage the only means of supporting itself, a government that can only exist by the sword?”.

Had Madison said clearly that a state cannot secede or written that into the constitution, it is certain no state would have ratified it. 3 states including New York and Virginia expressly reserved the right to unilaterally secede at the time that they ratified the constitution so they certainly weren’t agreeing to surrender their sovereignty forever to the newly created federal government.


57 posted on 06/29/2023 5:34:03 PM PDT by FLT-bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson