The commonwealth. (Greenwood, Miss.) 1896-1923, 1902-05-16
A Masterful Presentation of the Subject.

states interpreted the constitution as
the right of secession, for if
they had reassumed the powers granted
to the United States, they would neces-
sarily have ceased to belong to the
union.
Their sister states, by admitting them,
with THE reservation in their acts Of
ratification, to full co partnership in
the union, themselves necessarily rec
ognized the soundness of their interpre-
tation of the constition.
The Virginia resolutions Of 1898
which were written by Mr.. Madison,
and those of Kentucky of 1898 and 1893,
which were written by Mr.. jefferson,
expressly declared that in case Of the
exercise Of powers by the Federal gov
ernment which had not been granted
or delegated to it, such acts would be
void and of no force, and that the
states would have the right to Judge
for themselves, as well of any infrac-
tions as the mode and measure of re-
dress. These resolutions announced
what is commonly known Ias the doc
trine Of notification, with which it is
difficult to agree, since it is impossible
to perceive how a state could remain in
the union and not obey ITS laws. But
they are important as containing the
distinct affirmation that the states were
not united on the principle of unlimited
submission to their general government
and that it had no powers, and could
enforce none except those which had
been delegated to it. 1t necessarily
followed from the doctrine of these res
olutions that a state might lawfully Sc
cede from the union, since they ex
pressly declared that it was to judge
for itself of the mode and measure Oh
redress. They were the basis Of the
campaign Of the states rights party ii
1900, which elected Mr.. Jefferson tC
the presidency, became a part of its
creed, and were approved by majori
of the American people in every presi
Dental election thereafter, except two
down to the election Of Mr. Lincoln in
1860.
Col Timothy Pickering, of Massa-
chusetts, ga soldier of the Revolution, 8
member of Gen. Washington's cabinet,
and for many years g
New England, representative in con
the Home gress, openly advo
of Secession. Gated the secession
of Massachusetts, anC
and other Northern States, and the
formation by them Of a separate con
federacy. Ia letter to George Cabot
dated January 27, 1904, he said: "The
principles of our revolution point tC
the remedy-a separation. That this
can be accomplished and without spill
ing one drop of blood have no doubt
x l do not believe in the practica
bility of long continued union. A
northern confederacy would unite con
genial characters and present a faire1
prospect of public happiness; while the
southern states, having similarity of
habits, might be left to manage shei1
own affairs in their own way If a
separation were to take place, our mu-
tual wants would render a friendly and
commercial intercourse inevitable The
southern states would require the NOR
al protection of the northern union, and
the products Of the former would be
important to the navigation and COM
merce of the latter 1t (meaning
the separation) must begin in Massa-
chusetts. The proposition would be
welcome in Connecticut, and could we
doubt of New Hampshire2 But New
York must be associated, and how is
her concurrence to be obtained2 She
must be made the centre of the confed-
eracy. Vermont and New Hampshire
would follow, Of course, and Rhode Is
land of necessity" 1t is evident from
this letter Of Col. Pickering that he had
every reason to believe that the doc
trine for which he contended, that is to
say, the right of the states to secede
from the union, met with approval in
the states Of Massachusetts, New Hamp-
shire New York, Vermont, New Jersey
and Rhode Island. And it is also to be
observed that he entertained the view
which the south subsequently under
took to put into practical effect, that in
case of an irrecOncilable disagreement,
it was not only the right Of the states,
but their duty to peaceably separate
themselves from the union, and that