Right - they talked about circumstances that would warrant such a drastic move and possible mechanisms to facilitate such an action but none of those talks bore fruit.
None of them accepted the notion of unilateral secession or dissolution “at pleasure”.
Restrictions on secession were debated but never ratified...unilateral or not.
Why do you keep using that trivializing term "at pleasure"?
Isn't it up to every people to decide for themselves what constitutes hardship?
I know the English thought the Colonists were complaining about no great inconvenience, and from the British perspective, they were seceding "at pleasure."
Hardship and incompatibility are in the eye of the beholder, and the only beholder that matters are those people who feel they no longer belong with a National government that they regard as oppressive to them.
What constitutes necessary Self Determination is up to the people who want it, not to the people who want to stop them.