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

Skip to comments.

Walter Williams: Historical ignorance
http://www.richmond.com ^ | July 14, 2015 | Walter Williams

Posted on 07/24/2015 6:56:31 PM PDT by NKP_Vet

The victors of war write its history in order to cast themselves in the most favorable light. That explains the considerable historical ignorance about our war of 1861 and panic over the Confederate flag. To create better understanding, we have to start a bit before the 1787 Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia.

The 1783 Treaty of Paris ended the war between the Colonies and Great Britain. Its first article declared the 13 Colonies “to be free, sovereign and independent states.” These 13 sovereign nations came together in 1787 as principals and created the federal government as their agent. Principals have always held the right to fire agents. In other words, states held a right to withdraw from the pact — secede.

During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, a proposal was made that would allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison rejected it, saying, “A union of the states containing such an ingredient seemed to provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a state 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.”

In fact, the ratification documents of Virginia, New York and Rhode Island explicitly said they held the right to resume powers delegated should the federal government become abusive of those powers. The Constitution never would have been ratified if states thought they could not regain their sovereignty — in a word, secede.

On March 2, 1861, after seven states seceded and two days before Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration, Sen. James R. Doolittle of Wisconsin proposed a constitutional amendment that read, “No state or any part thereof, heretofore admitted or hereafter admitted into the union, shall have the power to withdraw from the jurisdiction of the United States.”

Several months earlier, Reps. Daniel E. Sickles of New York, Thomas B. Florence of Pennsylvania and Otis S. Ferry of Connecticut proposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit secession. Here’s a question for the reader: Would there have been any point to offering these amendments if secession were already unconstitutional?

On the eve of the War of 1861, even unionist politicians saw secession as a right of states. Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, “Any attempt to preserve the union between the states of this Confederacy by force would be impractical, and destructive of republican liberty.”

Both Northern Democratic and Republican parties favored allowing the South to secede in peace. Just about every major Northern newspaper editorialized in favor of the South’s right to secede. New York Tribune (Feb. 5, 1860): “If tyranny and despotism justified the Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861.” Detroit Free Press (Feb. 19, 1861): “An attempt to subjugate the seceded states, even if successful, could produce nothing but evil — evil unmitigated in character and appalling in content.” The New York Times (March 21, 1861): “There is growing sentiment throughout the North in favor of letting the Gulf States go.”

The War of 1861 settled the issue of secession through brute force that cost 600,000 American lives. We Americans celebrate Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, but H.L. Mencken correctly evaluated the speech: “It is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense.” Lincoln said the soldiers sacrificed their lives “to the cause of self-determination — that government of the people, by the people, for the people should not perish from the earth.” Mencken says: “It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of people to govern themselves.”

The War of 1861 brutally established that states could not secede. We are still living with its effects. Because states cannot secede, the federal government can run roughshod over the U.S. Constitution’s limitations of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. States have little or no response.


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: civilwar; secession; tenthamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
"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. ... 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."

~ Abraham Lincoln, Speech in the US House of Representatives, 1848

1 posted on 07/24/2015 6:56:31 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

I think we did this one already.


2 posted on 07/24/2015 6:58:36 PM PDT by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Bookmarked.


3 posted on 07/24/2015 7:03:40 PM PDT by Inyo-Mono
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: central_va

“I think we did this one already.”

We did. Let’s don’t do another beat down of our northern friends tonight.


4 posted on 07/24/2015 7:05:59 PM PDT by jeffersondem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Bump.


5 posted on 07/24/2015 7:07:08 PM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Walter Williams would look good on the Supreme Court.


6 posted on 07/24/2015 7:08:51 PM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (Save Western Civilization. Embrace the new Crusades.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
Walter Williams wrote: "The War of 1861 brutally established that states could not secede."

No. It established that tyranny can be enforced at the cost of 600,000 lives for an uncertain amount of time.

The recent nonsense regarding the Confederate Battle Flag simply illustrates the tyrannical nature of the victors in that war.

7 posted on 07/24/2015 7:09:18 PM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Why does the author consistently, insistently and repetitively refer to the War of the Rebellion as, the “War of 1861”?


8 posted on 07/24/2015 7:16:47 PM PDT by HandyDandy (Don't make-up stuff. It just wastes everybody's time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

As far as our government is concerned we can withdraw from the union whenever we want. We just have to be able to defend and hold our land. The way it is now. The way it has always been.


9 posted on 07/24/2015 7:18:31 PM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Nuc 1 Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HandyDandy
Why does the author consistently, insistently and repetitively refer to the War of the Rebellion as, the “War of 1861”?

It's refreshingly neutral.

10 posted on 07/24/2015 7:35:25 PM PDT by Rightwing Conspiratr1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HandyDandy

“Why does the author consistently, insistently and repetitively refer to the War of the Rebellion as, the “War of 1861”?”

You need to reread the article. In 1861, everyone knew that states had a right to secede. The right to secede was not rebellion; it was classified rebellion to justify the carnage.


11 posted on 07/24/2015 7:42:09 PM PDT by odawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
On March 2, 1861, after seven states seceded and two days before Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration

so question....why did these state secede? Lincoln had not taken office so what act had he done to the states as he had no power....let Lincoln say what offense he though he has commited

http://www.bartleby.com/124/pres31.html Abraham Lincoln First Inaugural Address, Monday, March 4, 1861

12 posted on 07/24/2015 8:02:12 PM PDT by tophat9000 (SCOTUS=Newspeak)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Walter Williams makes a valid and cogent case for secession.


13 posted on 07/24/2015 8:05:46 PM PDT by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

Walter Williams what a great piece. This man gets it.


14 posted on 07/24/2015 8:06:06 PM PDT by Carry me back (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: odawg
Rather than me rereading the article (which I found very displeasing the first time) let's skip ahead to the "War of 1864" when States were already seceding from the newly formed CSA, as Lincoln had predicted.

And by the way, what was the point of the author in resurrecting HL Menken just to have him mIquote Lincoln and then castigate Lincoln for making a statement he never made?

15 posted on 07/24/2015 8:17:05 PM PDT by HandyDandy (Don't make-up stuff. It just wastes everybody's time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

There is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits states from seceding; thus, they have the right to do so.


16 posted on 07/24/2015 8:43:45 PM PDT by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HandyDandy

Would you prefer the author use the more accurate and correct term The War of Northern Aggression?


17 posted on 07/24/2015 8:46:31 PM PDT by ForYourChildren (Christian Education [ RomanRoadsMedia.com - Classical Christian Approach to Homeschool ])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HandyDandy

I think the southern states had been itching to succeed for a while. Lincoln’s election gave them the excuse to do it sooner rather than later.


18 posted on 07/24/2015 8:46:57 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> ---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ForYourChildren

No.


19 posted on 07/24/2015 9:08:04 PM PDT by HandyDandy (Don't make-up stuff. It just wastes everybody's time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: HandyDandy

We Americans celebrate Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, but H.L. Mencken correctly evaluated the speech: “It is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense.” Lincoln said the soldiers sacrificed their lives “to the cause of self-determination — that government of the people, by the people, for the people should not perish from the earth.” Mencken says: “It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of people to govern themselves.”

Your assertion is this statement is factually incorrect?

Sure makes sense to me.

As to your first assertion. I only recall one example of consideration for succession. Also you say “1864 states were already....” they were 1 year away from losing a horrible unconstitutional suppression defense. See the paragraph below:

After initial problems, Davis’s government grew stronger as he learned to use executive power to consolidate control of the armed forces and manpower distribution. But some Southern governors resisted Davis’s centralization and tried to keep their men and resources at home. Although Davis used authority effectively, the insistence on preserving states’ rights plagued him constantly. Vice President Alexander H. Stephens, an early dissident, for example, sulked in his native Georgia and finally urged its secession from the Confederacy.


20 posted on 07/24/2015 9:24:59 PM PDT by rikkir (Anyone still believe the 8/08 Atlantic cover wasn't 100% accurate?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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