[Carry_Okie]

If the South was within its rights to secede, then Lincoln was a cruel oppressor.

I find nothing in the Constitution that precludes secession or enumerates a power to the Federal government to preclude it. Indeed, the fact that the Congress accepted Texas' specific reservation of that right in admitting it to the union belies any assertion to the contrary.

That said, that the article does not mention the way the South was paying 70% of the taxes shows that the author had no intention of a reasoned and balanced presentation.

[presidio9]

the South was paying 70% of the taxes

Care to break that down and clarify? Are you referring to the fact that the gentility feared manufacturing, so they had to import every single item they didn't grow or whip?

[jdege]

I find nothing in the Constitution that precludes secession or enumerates a power to the Federal government to preclude it.

That's because the Constitution didn't create the Union, it had already been created - as an explicitly perpetual one.

Every State in the Union had surrendered its right to unilaterally secede. Texas was unique only in that it received permission to secede in advance.

All of that is irrelevant, though. The South would have been allowed to secede peaceably, if it had chosen that path. Instead, it chose war.

[Non-Sequitur]

I find nothing in the Constitution that precludes secession or enumerates a power to the Federal government to preclude it.

There is nothing in the Constitution that precludes a state being expelled from the Union against its will either. Would you say that was a possibility?

Indeed, the fact that the Congress accepted Texas' specific reservation of that right in admitting it to the union belies any assertion to the contrary.

I believe that you are mistaken on that.

That said, that the article does not mention the way the South was paying 70% of the taxes shows that the author had no intention of a reasoned and balanced presentation.

Perhaps the author didn't meniton it because it isn't true?

[Sherman Logan]

the fact that the Congress accepted Texas' specific reservation of that right in admitting it to the union belies any assertion to the contrary.

I've seen this claim made a number of times, but I've never seen any documentation.

Do you have a link?

[Gondring]

Indeed, the fact that the Congress accepted Texas' specific reservation of that right in admitting it to the union belies any assertion to the contrary.

Texas wasn't the only one. Even several original states, like New York, Virginia, and Rhode Island, entered the union with reservations or explicit indication that they could back out.

James Madison, "Father of the Constitution":

"The assent and ratification of the people, not as individuals composing an entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they belong, are the sources of the Constitution. is, therefore, not a national but a federal compact

One other problem...Lincoln ignored Federalism, too.