Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1851-09-05
MIR. cobb's Repy to the Macon Committee.

replied to it at an earlier day
As have received communications from other
parts of the State on the same and kindred subjects
have determined in this reply. to consider the ques-
tons involved at some length, as desire that it may
be considered responsive to the various communl-
cations to which have referred.
Your letter propounds the two following nterroga-
tories:
lst. Do you believe that State by virtue of her
sovereignty, has the right peaceably to secede from
the Union, or is it your opinion, that the general
government has the Constitutional authority to CO.
cree her to remain in the Union! And should
call be made upon the militia to aid in attempting
to seeding State would you, if in the Exc
cutive Office obey such requisition
I'd. Do you believe that the late acts of Con-
gress termed the Compromise, were constitution
al, just and equitable :"
Your first interrogatory, directs my attention to
the question of secession and you have put the issue
upon the right of State to secede from the mon
without just cause AS this right is claimed by
many as constitutional right and by all of those
who advocate it in its modern acceptatlon as consls-
tent with constitutional obligations shall consider
it at some length in reference to its constitutional
bearings.
When asked to concede the right of State to Sc
cede at pleasure from the Union, with or without
just cause, we called upon to admit that the fra
mers of the constitution did that which was never
done by any other people. possessed OF their good
sense and intelgencethat is to prouade an the gerry
organisation of the government for ats oUn dlssotu
ton. 1t seems to me. that such course would not
only have been anomalous proceeding--butw wholly
inconsistent with the wisdom and sound Judgment
which marked the deliberations of those wise and
good men, who framed our Federal Government
While freely admitted that such opinion is en-
tertaned by many for whose Judgment entertain
the highest respect, have no hesitation in declar-
ing that the convictions of my own Judgment are
well settled that no such principle was contempla-
ted in the adoption of constitution. lift was
the purpose of the trainers of the constitution, to
subject the perpetuity of the Union to the WILL and
indeed. may add the caprice of each State, it is
most remarkable fact, that principle of such vast
Importance, involving the very existence of the re-
public should have been left open question: to
be decided by differences and metaphysical deduc-
tons of the most complicated character.
When one rises from a careful study of the const-
tuition of the United States, he feels impressed with
its wonderful adaptation to the wants and interests
of this growing people. Not only does he find wise
and judclous provisions and guarantees for the
state of the country it then existed but with pro
phetic wisdom its trainers to have penetrated
the future accommodating the government 10 the
necessities and requirements of its present increased
population and extended resources. | an not pre-
pared to admit that the men who exhibited so much
care and foresight in reference to all the various
parts of this complicated machne-woud have left
to vague mcclure the existence of the important
and vital power now claimed for each State, of dis
solving at pleasure the Union which had cost them
and their compatrots much toll. and labor and
anxiety If they had intended to provide for the
destruction of that noble structure which they were
then erecting with all the care and wisdom of able
Statesmen and devoted patriots. by such simple and
obvious MEANS as the withdrawal of any State from
the confederacy-they would have manifested their
intention by some plain and palpable provision of
the constitution. Such course would have been
characteristic of the honest practical and enlghten
ed statesmen of the convention. Their failure to do
carries the strongest conviction to my mind, that
no such principle was recognized by them. In con-
necion with this view Of the subject, the inquiry
forces itself upon minds, if each state reserved
the right to withdraw at pleasure from the Union,
why was there so much difficulty encountered by the
friends of the constitution in obtaining its rauhca-
ton by the different States! There were few, it
any, who were opposed to the formation of the I'm
On after the constitution had been submitted to the
States for ratification provided they could engraft
certain amendments upon it. The policy OF adopt
ing the constitution condition, that these amend
ments should be acceded to, urged with great
earnestness in the convention, and among the peo-
pie of several of the States but it finally aban-
doned on the ground that it would be a conditional
| ratification, and therefore inadmissable. On this
point must refer to the opinion expressed hy Mr..
Madison who has been called farther Of the consti-
tuition" and to whose exposition OF that sacred IN
strument the republican party have been accustom-
ed to look with such implicit confidence. Mr. Mad
ison says:
My opinion is, that reservation of right to
withdraw if amendments be not decided on under
the form of the constitution within certain time.
is conditional ratification that it does not make
| New York member Of the Union and conse-
quently. that she would not be received that
plan. Compacts must be reciprocal that princi-
pie would not in such be preserved. The con-
sttution requires an adoption an toto and FOREVER"
If the right reserved to each State to with
draw, it would have been an act of supererogation
on the part of New York any other State, to de-
clare in advanced, that she would withdraw or Sc
cede if the amendments she proposed to the consti
tuition not adopted. If the right existed, it
could be exercised we'll without as with the con-
dtion annexed to her ratification Of the constitution
and the assertion of it would have been useless in
terpolation and nullity. 1t was not regarded
however. at the time, by those who had been active
participants in the framing of the constitution Mr.
Madison considered the reservation Of a right tt
withdraw from the Union as condition that would
vitiate the ratifcaton He says further in writing
to Mr.. Hamilton this subject: " The idea of re
serving a right to wthdrdlr started at Richmond
y and considered conditional ratification, which
was itself abandoned as worse than rejection
If the opinion of Mr.. Madison, which have her,
referred to be we'll founded it puts an end to thi
controversy. There can be doubt about the fact
that he did not recognize the right of each State t.
secede from the Union at her pleasure. In ad
dtion to the facts which | have just considered
there is strong illustration of the opinion that pre-
vailed among the trainers of the constitution on thi
subject. in the action of the States Of North Carroll
ma and Rhode Island These States refused to com
into the Union for sometime after the ratification
the constitution. They not opposed to the for
u nation of the Fedaral Union but like some of tn
r other States they unwilling to adopt the con
r sttution as it then stood. IF it had been recog
Il IL, a.