The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-11-09
From the Mobile Daily Adcertissr
The Right or Secession.

This doctrine has of late found good many ad-
vocates among the ultras in the South. Nearly
every letter we have seen from the would be great
men, in the self named southern party, contains
this ultra doctrine.
Among the advocates who have lately taken a
seat on this plank of the platform, we notice the
New Orleans Courier and the Louisiana Statesman
The Sfatssman says 'The right OF revolution Id
a natural right. Secession is conventional. Revo-
luton is right we assert in resisting oppression
Secession is a withdrawal from compact, The
one ID always accompanied by an appeal 10 arms
the Ultima regum There il no reason why the
other should not be peaceable'
The Courier endorses the positions OF the States
man, and adds, that the right of secession had not
only been asserted by the leaders OF the Democratic
party, but that the Federalists of New England
claimed the right during the embargo laws-dur
ing the war OF 1912, and at the time of the annexa
ton of Texas in 1915. The Courier also says that
the right Of secession s reserved and not delegated
power.
troduced in South Carolina its advocates claimed
that 1t was peaceful and constitutional remedy. II
was peaceful State nterpositon 10 resist the laws
of the Union. Yet the leaders found it necessary
to make one general military camp OF the State ~
order to carry out this peaceful remedy. They
knew the laws Of the Union could only be resisted
successfully by force, and that iorcible resistance
was revolution. The advocates Of secession now
insist that II would be peaceabe-that II Is only
necessary for the State to resolve TO leave and her
citizens by that act absolved from all allegiance
to the General Government.
II is true the right to secedo has been claimed in
several instances by citizens of States who consid-
cred themselves aggrieved by the course of the
General Government, and we shall often hear il
claimed by States and communities composing mi
nortics who are unable to counterfeit the action OF
the majority But has this right ever been conceded
by the majority Alabama went into the Union al
her request and with the consent of the people
of the other States and il would seem 10 be neces-
sary, when che leaves, that it should be with the
n n n eli rnrr-
sentative, the Government OF the Union. The idea
OF secession being constitutional, a conventional,
or reserved right, we look upon as belonging 70
the sublmated school of chivalry-poitical utra-
lam. The right OF secession conceded, to the ex-
tent claimed and our National Government would
be rope of sand admit that one State has
the right, and the admission includes the right for
all to secede. Any State dissatisfied with the ac-
ton OF Congress would at once threaten to secede
unless Congress repealed the obnoxious laws. Take
the case Of the Mexican war. Some of the States
were violently opposed TO this war. Suppose they
had claimed and exercised the right of secession,
what would have been the condition of the Gov
eminent Of the Union' Total dissolution must
have followed as well national disgrace, dis
honor, and defeat.
The right of revolution is inherent, and the re-
sponsblty assumed in the exercise of this right is
30 fearful, involves so clearly life, liberty, and
property, that we have ample security against lis
exercise except in case of extreme oppression.
But, say the secessionists, this is peaceful
edy. We answer, it may be peaceful, and will
be, If the States remaining in the Union do not
consider their peace and safety involved, if the
President of the United States forgets his oath to
see the laws faithfully executed, makes effort TO
execute them, and permits the seeding State to
have her own way.
The President of the United States must see the
laws executed the seeding States must resist these
State resiss by force of arms what would it be but
revolution?