The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1893-09-02
FIRST SECESSION PROPOSALS.
Various Movements for Disunion Since
the RepubIIe's Foundation.
From lhe chicago Inter.oeean.

used in the Convention OF 1877, July D,
though then only with reference to the
States represented in the Convention. Ell
bridge Gerry remarked that unless some
compromise of existing difficulties could be
made secession, he foresaw, would take
place. 1t is an undoubted fact that for
some 80 years after the Inauguration of
the United States Government under the
Constitution, the right of secession was
never seriously questioned. 1t was ac
knowledged tacitly, if not by argument, as
belonging to the individual and unsurren-
dered rights of the States.
There is no doubt that projects for sepa-
ration from the Union were on foot in Ken
lucky before 1895, and in Pennsylvania at
the time of the whisky insurrection, though
these were rather the product of frontier
lawlessness than deduction from the doc
trine of State rights. But Judge Tucker,
in his edition of Blackstone in 1903, de-
clared that the sovereignty of the Federal
Government was only an emanation from
that of the States. Each of the States, he
said, is Astill sovereign, still Independent,
and still capable, should the occasion require,
to resume the exercise of functions as such
tot he most unlimited extent" From 1903
to 1912 the seat of secession sentiment was
in New England. A full accounr-of this
is given in an article in Our Curiosity Shop
book for 1891.
One of the most striking utterances on
the subject of secession was that of Judge
Rawle, of Pennsylvania, in his "Commen-
tary on the Constitution, written in 1925.
He said "The secession of State from
the Union depends on the will of the peo-
pie of such State The State Legislatures
only to perform certain organical operations
in respect to it. To withdraw from the
Union comes not within the general scope
of their delegated authority. But in any
manner by which a secession is to take place
nothing is more certain than that the act
ahoula be deliberate, clear and unequivo-
cal, and in such case the previous ligament
with the Union would be legitimately and
fairly destroyed. In the present Constitu-
ton there is no specification of numbers
after the first formation. 1t was foreseen
that there would be a natural tendency to
increase the number of States. 1t was also
known, though it was not avowed, that
State might Withdraw itself The number
would therefore, be variable. SecesSions
may reduce the number TO the smallest in
teger admitting combination. For State
cannot be compelled by other States to
withdraw from the Union, and, therefore,
if two or more determine to remain united,
although all the Others desert them, moth
ing can be discovered in the Constitution
to prevent it,"
1t is worth nothing that as late as No
vemher 8, 1860, Horace Greeley upheld
"the practical liberty, if not the abstract
right; of secession" only he insisted the
step should be taken "with the delibera-
ton and gravity be6tting so momentous an
issue" Secession came up as distinct
threat with the admission of Texas The
opponents and advocates Of the annexation
of their State were equally unrestrained in
their language. March B, 1S43, John
Quincy Adams and the anti-slavery Wings
issued an address to their constituents,
saying that the annexation project "would
result in and fully justify a dissolution Of
the Union. On the other hand, ''Texas
or disunion" was at that time a frequently
expressed sentiment at the South, but this
died away as the success of annexation
became assured.
In January, 1845, at an Anti-annexa-
tion Convention in Boston, William lloyd
Garrison urged the calling of Massachu-
Setts Convention to declare the Union dis
solved, and TO invite other States to join
her in new Union based on the Declara-
ton of Independence. His motion was
received with applause, but was not adopt
ed, The first official secession declaration
in the Southern States was embodied in
the resolution of the Georgia State Con.
vention of 1850, declaring that the State
"would resist, even TO secession, such anti
slavery legislation as the abolition of slavery
in the District of Columbia, or in the
Territories, or in the Interstate slave
trade" The South Carolina Convention of
1852 declared the State $ right to secede.
The passage of the Kansas Nebraska
bill and the continued agitation Of the
slavery question in Congress served to
stimulate the growth of the secession feel
ing at the South, and the Harper's Ferry
rendered movement to dis
solve the Union inevitable. "Ihose who
desired secession, says the historian, Alex
ander Johnston, ''were active, Persevering,
and in earnest; those who did not were at
the least negative, for they saw one great
chance of good, even in successful seces-
sion, release from National association
with future John Browns, and the ability
to protect themselves from such invasions
by open.and national warfare = Threats
Of secession abounded upon the floor of
Congress in the session of 1s59-60. But
the first direct movement was that of Gov
ernor-Gist, of South Carolina, who, Octo-
Der 5, 1860, sent circular letter to the
Governors Of the other Southern States
r.