Weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1858-1865, 1861-10-30
The Western Sentinel...Secessfon.

Ire western Sentlneles.SeCessfOn,
We stated recently that our contemporary of the
Western Sentinel had Inexperienced our views as
expressed in the following extract which that jour-
nal makes from the Standard:
Leaving out Of view the action of the States
which seeded first and the proclamation of Lincoln
ana looking alone to Virginia, and North Carolina
ana tennessee, and Arkansas, we ask, aoho made
the rerolution9 Not the secess:onists for they were
IN minority until Lincoln's proclamation Accord
ing to this view, the old Union men made the rerolu-
ton for The middle States, including North Carolina,
which seeded in May, were not permitted to move
until the old Union men gaze the cord. Every
body knows this to be So"
The Sentinel will observe that in the above ex-
tract we were looking alone to the action of the bor
dsr States, and were endeavoring to show, that so
Tar as they are concerned the old Union men made
the revolution We did this, not because we attach
ed any particular importance to this view of itself
but as an offset to those in this State of the old Sc
cesslon party who claim that they made the revolu-
tion and are, therefore, entitled to all the Offices
and honorsr We see no reason, after an examina-
ton OF the above language quoted by the Sentinel
to qualify it even much less retract it. It is strict
ly correct.
But Notwithstanding this, we agree with the Sen-
tinet that Lincoln Seward L. Co. dissolved the
Union, so far as the border States are concerned
and "usurped the government" and forced the "bor
der States to choose between secession and resis
| tance-subjusaton and despotisn:" We say we
agree with the Sentinel that this is true as to the
border States, North-Carolina included; and there
fore, soon as Lincoln called for troops to make
war on the South, We denounced him as usurper,
and turned cur back on the old Union world with
out end. We did this, too, with the most entire
consistency, for We had always held that the States
had right to secede for cause. In the Standard
ofSeptember Sd, 1851 in an article in reply to the
Washington Union, we said:
1--WE hold, as we have uniformly held, that no
State can secede mithout Just cause that, in other
! words, the Constitution must be papably violated
and the compact broken before any State can he re-
leased. We hold, as We have uniformly held,
that it this compact should be broken, the act will
be an act OF revolution on the part of the sectional
majority which perpetrateS it, for the simple reason
that it will work radical change in the Constu
ton OF government that this sectional majority viii
nevertheless as matter of course, hold on to the
government and proclaim the Union still in being
that the only alternative left to the minority of the
States will be to withdraw or secede from such ;
government, and provide guards for their fu
ture security; and that in so doing, they will e
forward under the authority Of sovereign States, thus
released from their obligations to the compact by
the act of the majority" &c.
In the same number of the Standard we quotet
the following language of Mr. Jefferson, as contain
ing the true doctrine on the subject:
"Are We then, to stand to our arms? No. Tha
must be the last resource not to be thought of unit
much longer and greater suferngs We must hav
patience and longer endurance with our brethren
while under deusion-give them time for reflection
| and experience of consequences-keep ourselves ii
a situation to profit by the chapter Ct accidents
and separate from companions mot revolt iron
rulcrs) only nhen the sole alternatives ett Al,
the dissolution Of our Cnion acih them, or u sui
mission to a government Without limitation IF pou
ers"
This was our position in 1851, in February 1851
and in May last, when we voted for and signed til
ordinance of secession. We have, therefore, bee
entirely consistent on this subject. Others ma
have changed, but certainly we have not.
We shall not pursue the subject further to-day
having quoted enough and said enough to convinc
our contemporary of the Sentinel that we were til
same States rights man in February, 1861, that W
were in September, 1851. If he should disput
this, however or should desire further explanation
we will reply to him in the same frank spirit whic
we have evinced in this article.