The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-06-16
SATURDAY, JUNE 16. 1900.
REVOLUTION NOT SECESSION.


The Spirit of the Valley, a Republican
newspaper published at IaIrisonburs, Va,
takes up for discussion the controversy
we recently had with an esteemed CORE
tspondent over the question whether the
United States are not more a nation to-
day than they were in 1861. In the course
of dts comments upon what we then said,
our contemporary says that the ''so-called
right of secession IS nothing but a declara-
ton of the right Of revolution which is
contained in the Declaration of lndeoen-
derce, and is a right acknowledged by
everybody all over the world, except by
q few despots and the very few who still
believe in the Divine right of kings" We
are very far from agreeing With our con-
temporary about this. The so-called right
OF revolution is nothing but the resolve
OF people that they Will no longer submit
10 an existing government. 1t cites no
precedents asks no favors, presents no
arguments, but stalks forward in the
cnight of a people to declare that they
have resolved 10 make change 1t is in
herent and as much part of national life
as the right of an individual in walking
from North to South to turn at his pleas
ura TO East or West But the right o<
secession was very different thing. If
the secessionists were right in their con-
struction of the Constitution, each State
reserved to herself. when she ratified the
Constitution, the right to withdraw from
the Union whenever the terms of the COM
pact were broken by the other States. We
have no sort OF doubt that every State
that ratified the Constitution supposed
that she had right to withdraw If the
Union became in her opinion, oppressive
TO her. We have no idea that any State
that entered the Union under the Consti-
tuition could have been induced to ratify
IL, if she had supposed that she was en-
tel-ing Into an iron clad agreement that
could never ne broken We are perfectly
clear. therefore, that the right of secession
existed in 1851 and it was a RICH. of a
wholly different nature from what is called
the right OF revolution. The one is the
exercise Of a right, the other is the exer-
else of might
The Spirit of the Valley goes on then 10
say that if the right of secession existed
in 1851, It equally exists to-day. Ne are
not SO sure of that. Price TO 1861. there
was nothing in the Constitution defining
citizenship of the United States. and the
most eminent statesmen and jurists OF
the day maintained that there was no citi-
zensilip Of the United States except as the
individual was a citizen of his State which
was q part of the Union. This absence of
citizenship OF the United States was one
of the proofs adducea of the right of seees-
sion. But the Fourteenth Amendment TO
the Constitution Of the 'Urlited States
begins by declaring that "au persons born,
or ,raturaiized in the United States are
citizens of the United States" This being
SO, ii is not easy 10 understand how a
citizen of the United States can end his
citizenship Of the United States without
file consent Of the United States, and if
this be 50, then there can be no right of
secession. The Fourteenth Amendment.
therefore. in defining citizenship of the
the United States seems TO have been
intended as an instrument for cutting out
OF the Constitution of the United States
the principle of secession which had there
.osore beer. cart OF it. THIS Is ,hs view
of DR. Curry in MS i>,oS O.. IA Southern
States.
So Tar as the southern States are con-
cez,nea the principle is certainly ended. A
moral abandonment was involved in the
surrender at Apa,omattox, and each South
ern State incorporated a provision in the
Constitution !; adopted. after reconstruct
NON. expressly renonnclng the right of Sc
cessaon for all times.