|
Section: 1 |
2 | 3 | 4 | 5
| 6
| 7 | 8 | 9
Given that the sovereign and independent states were delegating specific and
limited powers to the federal government established by the Constitution ,
and that by ratification of the
same they were acceding to the compact or "union," it follows by simple
logic that these states reserved the right to unmake the union or to
secede individually from it. Some states did not leave it to assumption,
they expressly stated in their ratification documents that they reserved
the right to withdraw from the union when and if, in the state's sole
judgment, the union threatened the sovereignty of the state or the
liberties of its people.
Stated plainly, the
several states, by their
own authority, made the union and by that same authority could unmake the
union or leave it. By virtue of the 9th and 10th
Amendments, the states reserved the right to secede because those rights
were not specifically prohibited by the Constitution.
The Articles of
Confederation styled itself a "permanent" union, however,
when the Constitution was being drafted, the delegates specifically moved
to strike any such suggestion. The states used their authority to
secede from the union formed by the Articles of Confederation and then to accede
to the new union (formed by the
Constitution) by ratification. The several states each held their
own Conventions where delegates selected by the people for this
purpose met to debate the benefits and risks of the proposed
Constitution.
The right of states to
secede was unchallenged until the 1830s at which point advocates
of central power (formerly the "extreme federalists") began to advance ridiculous
and contrived arguments to establish the federal government as supreme over
the states in matters other than those specifically delegated. Supreme
Court Justice Joseph Story and Daniel Webster
were two of the best known advocates
for this "one people, one nation indivisible" doctrine. Abraham Lincoln
adopted this "one nation indivisible" nonsense when it suited his political
agenda, despite the fact that he was contradicting his own
unequivocal previous public statements (see below).
Don't be swayed by the familiar ring of "one nation
indivisible ." It's familiar because it's a part of your
childhood indoctrination. That phrase was incorporated into the
Pledge of Allegiance by Francis Bellamy, an
American socialist, who wrote the Pledge in 1892 and advocated its
adoption nationally. The Constitution's Framers (especially the
Anti-Federalists) clearly feared a consolidated national government and
never used the word "indivisible." Bellamy's pledge was a
continuation of the ongoing propaganda against the idea of secession that
followed the War for Southern Independence.
In Lincoln's 1861 Inaugural address, he advanced this contrived and deceptive doctrine
that secession was "illegal" in order to (later) justify the use of force
to "preserve" the union. The convoluted theory suggests that the
"union" existed before Constitution or the Articles of
Confederation and that the "union"
was perpetual and indivisible. Read the 1861 Inaugural address
(link above) and see if you
can follow it. Lincoln's speech was often eloquent and poetic, but focus
on the faulty logic in his words.
The Declaration of
Independence described the thirteen colonies as "free and independent states." Clearly, this new found "one
nation indivisible" doctrine was fabricated for the purpose at hand
in 1861---to hold an advantage of political power (numerical majority in
Congress).
"WE hold
these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among
these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to
secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their
just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any
Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to
institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such
Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem
most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." --The
Declaration of Independence
"Any people anywhere, being inclined
and having the power, have the right to rise up and shake off the existing
government and form a new one that suits them better.
This is a most valuable, --a most sacred right--a right, which we hope and
believe, is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to
cases in which the whole people of an existing government, may choose to
exercise it. Any portion of such people that can,
may revolutionize, and make their own, of so much of the
territory as they inhabit. More than this, a majority of any portion
of such people may revolutionize, putting down a minority, intermingled
with , or neat about them,
who may oppose their movement. Such minority, was precisely the case, of the
Tories of our own revolution." --Abraham Lincoln, from the Congressional
Record, Jan. 12, 1847.
Lincoln made the above statement to Congress in
1847 in discussing the Mexican war, and
the right of the Texans to declare independence from Mexico after Mexico had declared independence
from Spain.
Even though the
Articles of Confederation labeled itself "perpetual," everyone
acknowledged that it, in fact, was not because the states exercised their rights
to secede from it and to accede to the union of the new
Constitution.
Lincoln argued in
his 1861 Inaugural address (see link above) that
"Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the
fundamental law of all national governments." Note that the Framers
specifically avoided the use of the words "national" and "perpetual" and
struck them from proposed documents. James Madison made it clear that
the people, their liberties and their "safety and happiness" were more
important than any form of government when he said, "The safety and happiness of society are the objects at
which all political institutions must be
sacrificed."
James Ronald Kennedy and
Walter Donald Kennedy, in their book Was Jefferson Davis Right?
expressed scorn for Lincoln's ridiculous proposition that the union
was perpertual.
"From his statement, it appears that
Lincoln viewed goverment as having some form of everlasting life.
Adolph Hitler predicted a mere one thousand years duration for his Third
Reich; Abraham Lincoln, on the other hand, contemplated his government
lasting forever."
Stated plainly, the Framers never intended for
the government to be perpetual. In fact, they
viewed occasional government "reform" to be healthy.
Remember, "...it is the Right of the People to alter
or abolish it and to institute new Government...." Abraham Lincoln
himself expressed the concept very clearly and convincingly in his speech
to Congress in 1847. From this, we can only conclude that Lincoln
understood very clearly that secession was a right. Any 1861
arguments to the contrary were sophistry.
The next sections will demonstrate that
not only was secession a right, but that the U.S. Government knew it and
took steps to subborn perjury, convict innocent men of treason and war crimes,
and to cast blame for their bloody conquest on their defeated foes,
the Confederate patriots.
The links below will lead the reader to a reasonably
comprehensive understanding of the Confederate
Cause.
-
-
Secession in principle: Part
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
What does the
Confederate flag represent?
-
Conclusions
....under
construction
Copyright © Steve Scroggins - All rights reserved.
|