The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1883-07-29

| bssadth from the ground which he at that tiLie
deliberately assumed. The positions then oc-
| cupied were tersely. but unfairly described by
MIR. John p. Hale a. follows: /. That South
| Carolina has just cause to secede from the
| Union. q That she has no right to secede. s.
! That We have no right to prevent her. Mr..
Curtis IL least successful In his objection to the
correctness Of Mr.. HAls's Grst proposition 70.
garded as q condemnation Of Mr.. Buchanan's
views The President did not say In his mos
sage that South Carolina had at that time
just cause for exercising the right Of revo-
luton BY Withdrawing from the Union. But
he does distinctly imply that she would have
such cause should the free States refuse to fur
nish substantial guarantees against future In
terference with slave property such guarnn-
tees as wore soon afterward embodied In the
constitutional amendment proposed BY Mr..
Crittenden. and In the very similar scheme
recommended BY the Peace Convention. When.
therefore, those we'll. intended efforts to forever
set at rest all controversies turning on tho
slavery question wero defeated by the almost
unanimous opposition OF tho Senators and
Representatives belonging to tho Republican
party. Mr.. Buchanan was not unreasonsbly be-
lieved By those who had read his message
indeed no was logically bound by the tenor Of
that paper-to hold that u proper occusion had
revolution by the slave States. 1t was
the perception Of this logical necessity. and not
any overt act Of tho outgoing administration
the conviction that Mr.. Buchanan, notwith-
standing conscientious determination to per-
form his Official duty believed that the South
had suffered by the rejection OF tho Crlttonden
compromise. a grievance serious enough to
warrant 1t in recurring to the principles laid
down In the Declaration OF Independence
which engendered the incurable distrust OF
him evinced by the Republican leaders during
tho last fifty days Of his Administration. and
their innexible refusal to supply him with
those means Of enforcing the Federal authority
which no was willing to use and repeatedly de-
manded. Tho inference which they drew from
the plain purport OF the language used By
him on Dec. 8 Ia indeed Irresistible: II can
only DO avoided by assuming that the President
did not mean what he said. Mr.. Curtis has not
chosen to adopt this limo OF defence. but we are
by no means sure. In view OF all tho circum-
stances. that 1t might not DO taken without
renocting on the essential purity OF Mr.. Blu
chanan's motives. There can DO no doubt that.
at the time when the message was written. Mr..
Buchanan. In common with many other Demo-
Gratis In the Northern and Border States. really
believed that the slavery question might be
settled by a constitutional amendment eauiva-
iout 10 tIluI buVOcht6u IVY CIlV6uu6u. DVt
to bring about thnt result 1t was imperative to
enlist the conservative feeling OF the North by
dwelling with special emphasis on the sncroach-
ments which. from their point OF view. the South
ern States might reasonably believe had been
or wero likely to DO committed upon the rights
secured to them by the Constitution. Mr..
Buchanan foresaw correctly that most OF the
resistance to such compromise would come
from tho triumphant North. and no sought to
diminish 1t by painting the injuries and FORE
holdings OF tho Southern States in colors far
darker than he would have employed on any
other occasion. 1t is not just to accuse him OF
insincerlty or OF sympathy with the attempt to
break up the Union. because In his impns-
stoned effort to preserve 1t he sought to COM
mend conclliatory measures BY rhetorical ex-
aggerntion Of tho grievances which were i'm.
polling certain States toward y separation.
As to Mr. Hale's second proposition. 1t did
but scant justice to the President in acknowl-
edging that he rocosnized no constitutional
right to sscede Nothing could be moro OK
plicit and psromptory than the language in
which Mr.. Buchanan distinguished the pre-
tended constitutional right OF secession in
voked by the Southern leaders from the in
alienRble right OF revolution. or OF resistance to
already experienced or Justly anticipated op-
preston. He repudiated the doctrine that the
Constitution itself either by any inference from
its expressed provisions. or by any deduction
from the circumstances Of its formation. iusti-
fed one or more Of the States welded by the
Union in breaking tho contract into which they
had entered with the rest Upon this point
the utterance OF James Buchanan on
Dec. 8. 1860. WAS as clear and categorical as had
ever been the utterance OF Webster in his dis
cussions with Calhoun 1t is true that the
great mass OF people at the North could not
appreciate this nice distinction between tho
natural right OF revolution and an alleged con-
stitutional right Of secession. and the Republi-
can party gradually took the position that II
the South could find no warrant for with.
drnwal in the Constitution 1t had no right to
30 ut all. On the other hand Mr.. Greeley. from
an equal inability to discriminate between the
two propositions. continued from the date OF
the secession OF South Carolina until some time
after Mr.. Lincolns Inauguration to declare
that tho exercise by tho South OF the right Of
revolution could not he justly interfered with
by the other parties to the constitutional COM
pact
Mr.. Jefferson Davis. however. and his prInci-
pal coadiutors who invariably insisted that
secession was constitutional right. were fully
alive to tho momentous consequences Of that
principle. and they attacked Mr.. Buchanan with
extreme bitterness for the doctrine enunciated
In his message. They foresaw that it might
become a matter OF tremendous import to tho
Southern States whether their withdrawal was
regarded as based upon the right OF revolution
or upon a constitutional privilege. In tho
former case. II conquered. those Statcs could
lawfully BIO held as subjugated provinces; in
tho latter cnse. II forced by prepondcrant power
to reenter the Union. they would at once re-
sumo the rights guaranteed to them by tho
Constitution and Of which. in theory. thoy had
never been divostod. II tho transformation OF
the republic into military government was TO
be avertcd. tho distinction drawn by Mr.. Blu
chanan. and repuiiated by Mr.. Greeley was OF
vital moment to the North AS we'll rs to the
South. and. happily for tho future OF our
reunited country. the principle that the
South had no constitutional right to
secode. and therefore, from legal point OF
view was never out OF tho Union has. on the
whole. been acted upon. though we do not
overlook such exceptions as tho blow leveled
nj q constitutional guarantee by the Enamel
patton Proclamation and certain othor grave
infrngencnts porpctrntsd in the iervor OF tho