Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1860-12-20
QUESTION OF SECESSION
For the Times.

QUESTION OF SECESSION.
For the Times.
Mr.. ED1roR:-If convenient, will thank
you to insert the letter send you; it is from
the pen of JAMES MADISON, in relation to
the, at present, all-important and all-absorb-
ing subject of Secession. No man, this
country has produced, was better competent
to speak upon and expound that subject
than Mr. MADIsoN-because he was among
the foremost of our Revolutionary patriots
and statesmen, for his constitutional learn
ing, his intimate and matured knowledge of
the structure of our Government, his free
dom from partizan profession, his calm,
digniGed, unpretending and unprejudeed
wisdom; and he was, in my humble judg-
ment, the greatest constitutions lawyer that
has ever lived SUBSCRIBER
December 18th, 1860.
NEW TESTIMONY FROM MR.. MADISON
The views of Mr. MADISON against the
assumed light of secession are so we'll known,
and were so consistently maintained from
the date of the ratification of the Constitu-
ton down to the time of his death, that
nothing is needed to add to the authority of
his great name on this question. AS cumu-
lative evidence On this point, however, is
valuable, because proceeding from one just
IL oall4ad. the .Eathes af tAas6 tuition y
we give place to the sabjoined reiteration Of
his opinion, which has just met our eye in
the columns Of our intelligent contemporary,
the Charlottesville (Va.) Reviep of yester-
day, the esd inst.-Nationaz Zatezllgencer.
UNPUBLISHED LETTER FROM MR.. MADISON
ON SECESSION.
We are indebted to our friend, ALExAN-
DER R1vEs, Esq, for the following letter
from Mr.. Madison on the subject of State
Secession.
In 1882 Mr.. Rives, under the signature
of ga Friend of Union and State-rights, !"
published two communications in the Vir-
ginia Charlottesville Adrocoae. The let
ter of Mr.. Madison was called forth by these
articles, and was addressed to the writer of
them under his non, de plume. It bears no
date, but letter from Mr. Rives in reply
to it in our possession is dated January 7th,
1888. We publish verbatim from the MS:
IcoNFIDENT1AL.]
have received the letter signed CA
Friend of Union and States-Rights, enclos-
ing two Essay Is under the same signature
1t mot usual to answer communications
without the proper names to them. But
the ability and the motives disclosed in the
Essays induce me to say, in compliance with
the wish expressed, that do not consider
the proceedings of Virginia in '98-'99 as
countenancing the doctrine that State
may at riW secede from its constitutional
compact with the other States A right
full secession requires the consent of the
others, or an abuse of the compact absolving
the seeding party from the obligations i'm
posed by it,
In order to understand the reasoning on
one side of question, it is necessary to
keep in view the precise state of the ques-
tion and the positions and arguments on the
other side. This is particularly necessary
in questions arising under our novel and
compound system of government. Much
error and confusion have grown out of a
neglect of this precaution.
The case of the alien and sedition acts was
a question between the Government and the
constituent body, Virginia making an ap-
peal to the latter against the assumption of
power by the former.
The case of a claim in State to secede
from its union with the others is question
among the States themselves as parties to a
compact.
in the former case it was asserted against
Virginia, that the States had no right to in
terpose Legislative declarations of opinion on
constitutional point; nor a right to inter-
pose at all against decision of the Supreme
Court of the United States, which was to be
regarded as tribunal from which there
could be no appeal.
The object of Virginia was to vindicate
Legislative declarations of opinion to desig-
nate the several constitutional modes of in
terposition by the States against abuses of
power, and to establish the ultimate authori-
ty of the States as parties to and creatures
Of the Constitution to interpose against the
decisions of the judicial as we'll as the other
branches of the Government-the authority
of the judicial being in no sense ultimate,
out of the purview and form Of the Consti-
tuition.
Much use has been made of the term "rc-
spcctivc' in the third resolution of Virginia,