The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1895-05-30

In doing SO were they guilty of treaso n
or rebellion9 If so, against whom1
Their allegiance was not given to any
government, but to the Constitution Of
the United States, and they never
violated it, but, on the contrary, only
seeded because Others violated it to
their injury and threatened ruin. Did
Virginia and New York and Rhode
Island, when they expressly reserved
the right to withdraw from the Union,
mean to say that they reserved the
right to rebel and commit treason
What did Massachusetts, mean when
in 1903 her Legislature "Resolved
that the annexation of Louisiana to the
Union transcends the Constitutional
power of the Government of the
United States," and that "it formed a
new confederacy to which the States
United by the former compact are not
bound to adhere3 Could there be a
palmer declaration of the right of a
State to secede2
And what did the Hartford conven-
ton, at which the New England States
were gathered in 1915, mean by their
declarations:
"That in cases ofdeliberate, danger
Gus and palpable infractions of the Con-
stitution, affecting the sovereignty OF
the State and liberty of the people, it
is not only the right but the duty of
such State to interpose its authority
for their protection in the manner best
calculated to secure that end.''
And that:
"When emergencies occur which are
either beyond the reach Of judicial
tribunals, or too pressing to admit of
delay incident to their forms, States
which have no common umpire, must
be their own judge and execute their
own decisions
John Quincy Adams, in letter Of
December goth, 1928, in regard to
that movement said
"That their object was, and had been
for several years a dissolution of the
Union and the establishment of sep
crate confederation he knew from
unequivocal evidence, although not
provable in court of law and that in
case of civil war, the aid of Great
Britain, to effect that purpose would
be assuredly resorted to, as it would be
indispensibly necessary to their de-
signs.'
Was John Quincy Adams a SLAM
derer of his own people, or were they
guilty, as he plainly alleged, of a
reasonable design to subvert the gov
ernment, and ask the assistance oi
Great Britain in the accomplishment
of their purpose? Yet these are the
people who have cried the loudes,
about Southern rebels and traitors,
when the plain and undeniable truth
of history is, that notification and Sc
cession were born and nursed in New
England. l appeal to writer's and
records of that section for the verifca-
ton of this statement. From these it
will appear that, beginning in 1876
with the excitemement over Jay:
treaty, and repeated in 1892, 1894
1896 to 1900, and from 1905 to 1875
there was a concerted plan of secession
and disunion-a plan which John
Quincy Adams said:
| 'sWas 80 far matured, that the propo.
sal had been made to an individual to
permit himself, at the proper time, to
be placed at the head Of the military
movement, which, it was foreseen
would be necessary to carry it into
execution
The biographer of Daniel Webster,
who is one of the Senators from Massa-
chusetts, after admitting that "unfor
tunately the facts were against" Mr.
Webster's argument that the Constitu
ton was not compact between tht
States, goes on to say:
"When the Constitution was adopted
by the votes of States at Philadelphia
and accepted by the votes of States il
popular conventions, it is safe TO say
that there was not man in the coun.
try from Washington and Hamilton, OF
the one side, to George Clinton ant
George Mason On the other, who re-
garded the new system as anything
but an experiment entered into by th'
States and from which each and every
State had the right to peaceably with
draw, a right which was very likely tc
be exercised"
And yet, this biographer, who
svhen zo,iting history, is compelled tt
pen this candid paragraph, is th'
author of a force bill against tn
Southern people, and a Representative
of the EXTREMIST views of Massachu
sets.
There are at least three extraordi
nary facts which will arrest the atten
ton of the future student of American
history in connection with secession
One is that, notwithstanding the RICH
of State TO secede was disputed, AM
after acrimonious discussion, was hnall
fought over four years still, when tn
struggle ended, although three differ
ent amendments were added to tn
Constitution of the United States t
secure the freedom, and the civil an
political rights of the negro race, ther
was no amendment adopted or offere
denying the right Of secession; an
that, therefore, SO far as any declare
ton in the Constitution is concerned
it remains just as it was before the wa
Another-and it borders on the al
! surd-is that out of the forty-fol
States Of the Union there are just mir
i of the seeding States, two borde
+. States (West Virginia and Maryland
and one of the Western States, On
y vada, which was admitted during Il
!: war; whose Constitutions now den
|. the right Of secession.
e The third extraordinary fact is tha
although the Northern people unan