Replies

They reserved that right only if a Bill of Rights were not amended to the Constitution.

No. New York said, 'That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness ... Under these impressions, and declaring that the rights aforesaid cannot be abridged or violated".

"[I]n confidence that the amendments which shall have been proposed to the said Constitution will receive an early and mature consideration." They trusted that the proposed amendments (following their ratification) would be addressed, they did not state that "the rights aforesaid could be abridged or violated" upon ratification of a Bill of Rights or were superseded.

Virginia declared and made "known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression", that "whatsoever imperfections may exist in the Constitution, ought rather to be examined in the mode prescribed therein, than to bring the Union into danger by a delay, with a hope of obtaining amendments previous to the ratification". Again, nothing contingent upon ratification of a Bill of Rights

Rhose Island wrote, "That the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness", "Under these impressions, and declaring that the rights aforesaid cannot be abridged or violated, and that the explanations aforesaid are consistent with the said Constitution, and in confidence that the amendments hereafter mentioned will receive an early and mature consideration, and, conformably to the fifth article of said Constitution, speedily become a part thereof." Ditto.

If New York, Rhode Island, and Virginia were so insistant that they could seceede, maybe they should have got it written in the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND.

You know the constitution. That thing that neo-confederates think should be used to toilet paper when it doesn't suit them.

Words have meaning despite mystical mumbo jumbo like secession where things that are given away freely are really retained and not given away.

"...may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression"
"...the rights aforesaid cannot be abridged or violated".

Can you show us what the Federal Government did in 1860-61 to cause "injury or oppression", or "abridge or violate" any rights? Violations of those causing 'secession' are in Madison's words, simply another name for revolution, while secession in the absence of intolerable oppression is nothing but a violation of a faith solemnly pledged -- i.e. an illegitimate insurrection.