New-York daily tribune., 1861-12-27
QUESTIONS TO A DISTINGUISHED CHA1'
pION OF SECESSION.

r. NJ n U.rryryuIIIx author ef the rcatise on Drotf
ct Deroi,s css Nations Ns.f'o, 0refqae' Ste"'' 80
SIR: Almost with religious Difference have ios
wears drawn from your works, as from tue pures
source all the most elevated, just, and ennooiint
views of international duties, rights, and relations
The more painful therefore, was it for an obscure
and unknown pupil Of yours not to accept your ias
publication, Qselques Questions" etc., Win eq'A
difference. I shall abstain from following psgs y
mage or line by line, the reasonngs, assertions an<
statements of the above disouisition To avoid beng
tedious, will attempt to briefly point out YVES
seems to me to constitute the most 50 lent cona'0ns
First of all: wish to correct your error eoncera
ing the number of Colonies who united against Ed
gland. You, Sir, speak of six, whereas-Georgla NO
beinsrepresente Colonies participated In the
fret Continental Congress in Philadelphia in Sept,
I774. At the second Congress, which met iu May
IT'S the thirteen Colonies were Represented, as IL
due time Georgia sent her Delegates. You have
been led into error by the heading in Martens
1yaitfs de Pair, over the act Of this Congress Ma,
20, I775.
These Colonies, as such, originally bad no es
tablisLed sovereign rights. Their Governors were
by the King. and sent to the Colonies ron
England The Colonies, as such, had no sovereignty.
not even the power of forming union among theus
eelyes, for objects and purposes common TO them an
etc. See Carsiss Hist. of the Consi., A., ~ Inc
nature Of the public acts passed BY them' oetwee.
l77i and July 4, l776, shows how slowly ans
GRADUALLY the consciousness of certain soveregs
rights aud of collective nationality was evoked ans
dsveloped by events, and demonstrates that such
sovereorty was not inherent in them. simpif
comparison of the Constitution-as yeu call At"
l775 and of the Constitution Of 1887, will eonvinee
Won of the erroneous nature OF your appreciation "
the sn;rit and tendency Of these two docunsns ~
The legal opinion of Edward Bates, the presen. a"
torpsv.G General of the United States Ainntiy
do Justice). lately published, has proved
vond any possible logical refulsiion ''s'
| colonies became States, aud acquired ""
ereiouty and independence exclusively anu ~
trnsically only when they constituted un'vS ,h.
federation; therefore, they could not a0as ,;J ros
Union rights and prerogat'res wh'n ~. uo,,l
possess previous to the birth Of tins ~. ~ ,r,,.
ever. ip briefly dismssing the sneec'o' Wv
right of Secession, you show thai ~. oS~hv
! 80 ha decided-por even to be easily unoe'"0o
nr,s;der.. civil or an ipsarrestionary ~ai -
:. 81, =. ssr.ct. a regular war, a@ gserrs reg sr
49,, h.ll;,.rsnts. The reasons and the c''ai-~
~. - .,,. abstraction between the lawful sove'*
I'D ,he rebsl. and the limitations Of the s0nai''
hell;vereut. oceasionaLy granted to 'ne TO- .a ~
.,.,,sd s0r the sake Of humanity, are exPSm "a
=. ,.... outned by those writers among WIZ 80
1910 - occupv such Q presminsns plACs' 80
Ia ..,n,;onaliv The Poles in 1881, the
s"'' 90 20 h.d no sduission Of their behss''-s
l