Adams's speech isn't a very convincing defense of secession or the Confederacy. It's more rhetorical than a close legal or historical analysis. Adams doesn't convince me that George Washington would have supported Southern secession. He also all but admits that the secession movement wasn't peaceful and was originally inspired by the desire to protect slavery and create a "great semi-tropical slave-labor republic."
But being from one of the First Families of Massachusetts, Adams had much sympathy and fellow feeling for the First Families of Virginia. Nice sentiments, maybe, but what he wrote and said doesn't amount to a convincing justification for the Confederacy.
I’ll take Occam’s Razor over that tortured rationale you’ve invented for why Adam’s wrote what he did.
Adams tells us in his essay why he chose to examine the legal issues of secession so long after the war that he had fought in. Because no one else had bothered to examine it, and he was both an historian and a scholar.
He never once mentions race, but your explanation is based upon the idea that race is what motivated him. That reads like the Left’s most popular explanation for everything that they disapprove of, attribute it to hidden racism. Don’t know why you’d want to go there.
Well at least this time the target of a racism accusation is the scion of the most prominent New England family in American political history instead of the usual Southern whipping boy, so you deserve credit for breaking new ground.