The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-11-04
DR.. WILSON AND SECESSION.
Time Has Not Rendered the Work OF
the Fathers of the Republic Obsolete
Editor OF Tho Tires

Sir--f dislike to utter hote OF p'S-
cord amid the acclaim Of approbation
with which Professor Woodrow Wilson
exceptionally bright and int esting lee
lures were received by large and appre-
ciative audiences at Richmond College;
In many respects these lectures have
been admirable. but his presentation OF
the right OF soces sion and or the con-
struetion of the federal constitution
should not 7 think be PASSED over SUD
silentia." The learning ability ana AT
trac.iveness Of the lecturer render MS
views. IL erroneous all The more dan
eerous. Mr.. Wilson IN his Monday even
ing lecture presents n Wow Of tho right
Of secession which seems 10 be coming
somewhat popular at the north. The
doctrine he advocates. stripped or the
hne language in which II IS clothed
eeerns 10 he that there Is a higher law
than tho constitution, that the constitu-
tion NAV be made 10 mean something en-
tirolv different from what its trainers in
tended IN short, whatever sectional inter
ests and passions may want II TO mean.
That the north and south were both right
from their respective points Of view. that
the south had I'm 1861 the right 20 secede
from the union, but the north had the
RIGHT 10 forcibly resist the exercise of
the right. Mr.. Wilson says during the
early davs Of our national existence this
right (of SECESSION If not openly avowcd,
was tacitly assented 20 I'm every section
Of tho country" but he thinks that oc-
cording 10 tho better and higher view Of
the constitution. owing 10 certain indus
trial and economic changes I'm tho condi-
ton of part Of the country. this right
has somehow been lost; that there are
two methods Of Interpreting the consutu-
tion. one the lawy cr's method ana inc
other. the method Of the historian ana
statesman which he evidently thinks IS
the true one and which be says Is begin
ming 90 prevail even I'm tho South can
there be two admissible methods or IN
corporations Of n written instrument
which lead 10 conflicting results2
Mr. Wilson SAYS. written constitutions
are not mere legal documents. they are
the skeleton frames Of n living organ
ism and are subject 10 an tho changes
that living organisms undergo
some one has said "therc is nothing
so false as a smile a written constitu-
ton ought 10 be and ours was intended
TO De the safeguard Of the peoples liber-
ties but it must fail Of IFS end if any
section Of tho country. however large
and prosperous. can interpret II other
wise than according TO it's express terms,
OF course we may and must look 20 con-
temporary history 20 ascertain the true
meaning Of the terms used IN the instru-
mont. 1 insist that what Mr. Wilson
calls tho lawyers method of internreta-
ton rs the true method. IL was the meth
Oh OF the men who framed the cOnstitu-
ton and has been the method Of cOnser-
vative statesmanshiD from that day 70
this do not question that in the
northern section Of the country there had
been before 1897 a great change I'm ec0-
nomic conditions Manufactures. trade,
and commerce. aided by sectional ieglslar
ton. had made the north great and pros
porous. but ] fail 20 see how AN that
could change the organic law OF the land.
I take 70 that Mr.. Wilson does not be-
love I'm state sovereignty Tie seems 90
treat II as an ahsurdty and has much
to say about the difficulty or imposs-
hiity OF giving effect 20 The viii o. the
people. 10 is true that a State must act
through her agents and those % whom
her power is delegated may De false 10
the trust (and some very striking recent
examples of this might be eiven but The
power at last must rest with the people
AS a community and can rest nowhere
else among % free people.
Whether in 1861 the Southern states
had the right TO secede or not depends.
not upon the countrys development be-
tween 1857 and iS6l, but upon the nature
of the constitution framed boy the c0n-
vention OF 49, n the government then
formed was a natural government, II the
States I'm entering the Union partedswilh
their sovereignty and, so 90 speak were
absorbed by the general government
then we may concode that there could
Doc no right OF secession; but if the
Union then formed was % compact be-
tween free and independent States which
did not part with one jot or little OF
their sovereignty; if the powers given
TO the general government were dele
gated powers 10 boa held ina trust Tor the
States. and 81 AN power not So dele
gated was reserved by the states. theh
tho right 10 withdraw from the Union
seems unquesti0nabe and the several
States in the last resort. were the sole
judges of the necessity Of Withdrawing.
It may not Dee out OF place here merely
to suggest the line of argument for the
federal character of our government 10
depends upon the construction TO be
given 90 the Instrument creating the
Union or embodying the compact. 10
must be construed according 20 its terms
and those terms must be understood not
I'm the light Of what has subsequently
occurred. but I'm the light of antecedant
ana contcmpOraneous history; ana doing
this. we find that tho several States
during their colonial existence were sepa-
rate and distinct communities with sena-
rate charters and governments. AS such
they declared their independence. The
Declaration OF Independence I'm express
terms makes them free and Independent
States" They separated from England.
but formed no sort OF consolidation
among themselves.
No one questions that tho revolution
arv government was one OF Gree and
Independent States" No ono contends
that any consolidation resulted from the
articles Of confederation. Tn forming The
present government there was no pur-
pose 20 change tho character % the
Union. but the object was the formation
OF "a more perfect Unlon'-a different
Organization" OF the government and
not a radical change In its nature was
Certain terms IN tho Constitution. such
MS owe. the people" and "the United
States" have been held 20 indicate tho
national character Of the government
but these terms had acquired q fixed
meaning. and when construed I'm the
light OF their use IN the articles OF conc
az we'll as their use by wash
ington and others In reference 20 fhe
revolutionary government they give no
support TO the idea OF o. national gov
ernment.
Il seems difficult 20 study tho history
Of this country before and up 20 the |
final adoption OF the Constitution By the |
several states without concluding that
the government under our present Com |
stitution was one OF confederate1 states, |