[You quoting President Buchanan]:
"In order to justify secession as a constitutional remedy, it must be on the principle that the Federal Government is a mere voluntary association of States, to be dissolved at pleasure by any one of the contracting parties. . . . "
And here is Madison in Federalist #39 (which I quoted before):
"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act."
I discovered just now that I did not respond to a comment you made in Post 294 about something I posted in Post 288 about what Madison said in the minutes of the Virginia Ratification Convention. Here is what Madison is recorded as saying:
"An observation fell from a gentleman, on the same side with myself, which deserves to be attended to. If we be dissatisfied with the national government, if we should choose to renounce it, this is an additional safeguard to our defence."
In your response you argued:
I think that alleged quote is disputed and was never later acknowledged by Madison himself.
The word here used is "dissatisfied", only one step removed from "annoyed by" or "in disagreement with", suggesting any minor dispute might result in secession -- Madison never agreed to that, but maintained the clear distinction between "necessity" and "at pleasure".
Madison was responding to Patrick Henry's argument that the Southern states would be outvoted in the Union what with 7 Northern states and 6 Southern states (as counted back then). So, Madison's response deals directly with Henry's argument. It had nothing do do with your assertion Madison always made a "distinction between 'necessity' and 'at pleasure' ". You seem to have have "at pleasure" on your mind. Statements of what the Southern states decided were "necessary" for their secession are always interpreted by you as "at pleasure." I doubt that any of the seceding states considered them that. I give you an 'A' for consistency in your responses though.
In Madison's statement above about "a gentleman on the same side with myself," Madison was referring to a statement by the President of the Virginia Ratifying Convention who had said (my emphasis below):
"Where is the cause of alarm? We, the people, possessing all power, form a government, such as we think will secure happiness: and suppose, in adopting this plan, we should be mistaken in the end; where is the cause of alarm on that quarter? In the same plan we point out an easy and quiet method of reforming what may be found amiss.... we will assemble in Convention; wholly recall our delegated powers, or reform them so as to prevent such abuse; and punish those servants who have perverted powers, designed for our happiness, to their own emolument."
And that is exactly what Virginia did in 1861. In 1861, Virginia did assemble in Convention, and they did recall their delegated powers. In 1861, they did cite and use the Virginia reassume powers of governance statement written by Madison, Marshall, and three other Federalists and issued in the 1788 ratification document.
And I find I need to correct you on another thing you said in Post 294:
rustbucket quoting Madison Federalist #46: "Were the plan of the [Philadelphia] convention adverse to the public happiness, my voice would be, Reject the plan. Were the Union itself inconsistent with the public happiness, it would be, Abolish the Union."
I cited Federalist #45, not #46. And you followed my citation with:
Right, Madison is here talking about voting & mutual consent, not unilateral unapproved declarations of secession at pleasure, which no Founder ever proposed or supported.
Need I say it? There you go again.
You cite Thomas Jefferson. So can I. Here is Thomas Jefferson to John Breckinridge, 12 August 1803 [Source, bold emphasis added]:
"the future inhabitants of the Atlantic & Mispi states will be our sons. we leave them in distinct but bordering establishments. we think we see their happiness in their union, & we wish it. events may prove it otherwise; and if they see their interest in separation, why should we take side with our Atlantic rather than our Mispi descendants? it is the elder & the younger son differing. god bless them both, & keep them in union if it be for their good, but separate them if it be better."
I shall be out of pocket for perhaps a week. On the road again, per Willie Nelson. Even in these Covid times. See you later.
rustbucket quoting Madison:
"Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act." Thirteen states joined in happy-hippie Union at pleasure:
Sure, just as marriage is (usually) a voluntary act between adults, easy to do, not so easy to get out of.
Madison certainly never intended to mean that the Union of states was a "free love" affair, a mere hippie-dippy "commune" of states where they might come & go as they wished, at pleasure.
rustbucket: "Madison was responding to Patrick Henry's argument that the Southern states would be outvoted in the Union what with 7 Northern states and 6 Southern states (as counted back then).
So, Madison's response deals directly with Henry's argument.
It had nothing do do with your assertion Madison always made a "distinction between 'necessity' and 'at pleasure'. "
Again, the key word in that alleged Madison quote is "dissatisfied", only slightly stronger than "annoyed with" or "disagree with" and in no-way equivalent to our Founders' Declaration of Independence word, "necessary" or "necessity".
Indeed, "dissatisfied" for all practical purposes is indistinguishable from "at pleasure", and therefore I say the quote is fake, and was never repeated or even acknowledged by Madison afterwards.
Indeed, you cannot find a quote where Patrick Henry himself declares secession at pleasure perfectly acceptable.
rustbucket: "Statements of what the Southern states decided were "necessary" for their secession are always interpreted by you as "at pleasure."
I doubt that any of the seceding states considered them that."
No, I'm saying factually that on November 5, 1860 Southern states had no legitimate or "necessary" reasons for secession, none!
Nor did they even threaten secession on November 5.
And yet suddenly, after November 6, some (Mississippi & Georgia) pretended that secession was now urgently "necessary" (while neither South Carolina nor Texas claimed it).
So what changed?
Answer: absolutely nothing except the constitutional election of a new President.
That is the very definition of "at pleasure".
rustbucket: "And that is exactly what Virginia did in 1861.
In 1861, Virginia did assemble in Convention, and they did recall their delegated powers.
In 1861, they did cite and use the Virginia reassume powers of governance statement written by Madison, Marshall, and three other Federalists and issued in the 1788 ratification document."
Sure, but you skipped right past the key point here: Virginians first voted against secession at pleasure.
By a huge margin Virginians understood in March 1861 that there was no valid reason for secession, no "injury or oppression" as specified in their ratification statement, and so they rejected secession.
Only after the Battle of Fort Sumter did the majority find enough "injury or oppression" to justify secession, and even then a large minority so objected they themselves seceded from Virginia!
No Founder ever proposed or supported unilateral unapproved declaration of secession at pleasure.
rustbucket: "Need I say it? There you go again."
Sure, repeating the facts and truth for a very slow-learning pupil... ;-)
rustbucket "You cite Thomas Jefferson. So can I. Here is Thomas Jefferson to John Breckinridge, 12 August 1803 [Source, bold emphasis added]:"
That is a most curious quote considering that fewer than three years later President Jefferson had his VP Aaron Burr arrested and tried for treason for the crime of attempting to lead Louisiana to secede from the Union.
rustbucket: "I shall be out of pocket for perhaps a week.
On the road again, per Willie Nelson.
Even in these Covid times. See you later."
I've been amazingly healthy (thank God!), never had the flu, not even a bad cold, but at my age Covid seems serious enough to take precautions, so I signed up for the shot when it becomes available.
Will let you know how it goes, FRiend. ![]()