Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1860-12-20
MR.. CUSHING ON SECESSION
AND COERCION.

SIN SloSISSAN@
AND COERCION.
We extract the following from the speech
delivered by Mr.. Caleb Cushing, at New
buryport, on Monday evening, the 10th
instant.
cit is not worth while to stop here to
discuss the question whether to secede is,
on the part of one of the States, constitu-
tional right, or simply an act of revolution.
That is question, which any seeding
State, of necessity, decides for rs.lf, up
on precisely the same responsibilities, whcth-
er it be constitutional or revolutionary
dissolution of the Union. Seeding, she
takes upon herself the burden of all the
contingencies of dissolution of the Union.
And what is remarkable in the case, these
contingencies are just the same, and no
others, whether State has or has not the
constitutional right, whether it be legal
or revolutionary act If State has the
right to secede, all you can do, is to per-
suade or coerce her to return and that is
all YOU can do if she has no right to secede
Hence, secession occurring, it is quite i'm
material to the present subject how that Sc
cession exists, whether de jure or de facto
only; it is the fact, which mainly concerns
the Federal Government and the remaining
States.
"But you ask, if the Southern States, or
either of them, should, for any cause, Sc,
cede from the Union, has not the Federal
Government power to coercc the return OF
such States, or State back into the Union
"On this point, there is no room left tol
doubt. Our constitutional history, the CO.
temporaneous opinion, and the text of the
Constitution, are conclusive on the subject
uThe old articles of Confederation con
tained no provision for the coercion of the
States or their people. And the States hao
expressly reserved to themselves all power;
not delegated to the Confederation. Hence
it was universally conceded at the time, az
Mr.. Curtis, in his history of the Constitu
tion, correctly says, that the Confederation
had no such power, and all its Legislation
both in its nature and its form, prescribed
duties to the States, without their being
any constitutional power to euforce those
duties.
"But, in like manner, the Constitution
of the Union is destitute of any provision
for the coercion of States; and that als'
contains a provision that all powers no
granted to the Federal Government, arr
reserved to the State or the people thereof
Is not that just as conclusive of the im
s port of the Constitution as it is of that
the articles of Confederation?
"But other facts exist to make assuranc
doubly sure on this point.
"Mr. Edmond Randolph's plan, whicl
was the groundwork of the Constitution
contained clause to authorize the coercion
of any delinquent State. But this claus
was struck out at the suggestion of Madi
son, who showed that State could be CO
creed only by military force; that the US
t of military force against State as such
would be in the nature of declaration G
war; and that a state of war might be re
S garded as operating the abrogation or disse
: luton of all pre-existiug ties between tn
, belligerent parties, and it would be of itse
: the dissolution of the Union.
: "Thusi appears that the idea of coercin
o the obedience of States was proposed i
the Constitutional Convention, considere
n and rejected Of course, there cannot b
It the slightest pretext fer pretending that tn
= Federal Government now possesses any sue
power.
: "Rejecting this idea, the Conventio
# took up aud imported form to the altern
e tive idea of enabling the Federal Cover
e ment to step over the lines of the Stat
h and act upon individual persons directl.
! which it could not do under the Confet
l. Grafton. The object was accomplished
J. establishing Federal courts of justice, wit
= power to enforce judicially, as against pc
d sons, all the provisions of the Constitution
s. and all provisions of acts of Congress.
awe, then, the States and the Unio
le stand in this remarkable position relative
Of one to the other; if one of the States s
lie cedes-and although it be admitted, Fl
er the arguments sake, that the secession is
Of mere act of rebellion or REVOLUTIONARY