In the Shadow of Our Founders: Part Three

leaves the door open to nullification and arguably secession, Jefferson affirmed Kentucky's "attachment to the Union" and pledged that the state will "bow to the laws of the Union" which do not "violate" the Constitution.

In spite of their pro-Union sentiments and very cautious and guarded allusions to remedies possibly needed to contain the federal government, defenders of secession doggedly lay claim to the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions. They do now. And they did in 1860 and 1861. To the extent that their interpretation of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions may be correct, one naturally must question the method by which states can conclude that the federal government has overstepped its constitutional authority and trampled on their rights.

"No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity," wrote Madison in Federalist #10. "With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time..."

Yet, this is precisely what the cotton states did in 1860, in response to Abraham Lincoln's election as President. Surely, Madison and his colleagues at the Constitutional Convention would have had serious reservations about states unilaterally, and of their own accord, determining that their rights were being violated and that secession was the only solution.

Regardless of who evaluates the circumstances and causes, are there instances when secession is justified? This is, after all, the central question separating Lincoln and Davis, and the evidence on this point is somewhat mixed. First, it seems clear that the Founders would never have condoned separation for "light and transient reasons" (to borrow a phrase from Jefferson's Declaration of Independence on the prudence of maintaining stability in government). But what if the reasons weren't "light and transient"?

Some of the Founders, including probably Thomas Jefferson himself, would likely have considered secession if certain parties to the Constitutional compact were menacing others. But we must remember that, to the extent we accept the doctrine of original understanding (or intent), as both Davis and Lincoln essentially did, the evidence tilts strongly toward Lincoln when it comes to those Founders who developed and ratified the Constitution. Only under the most extraordinarily dreadful circumstances would the majority of Founders, particularly the Constitution's supporters, have entertained even the thought of dissolution.

What the Founders Might Have Said of the South's Reasons for

Go To Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Articles in this Topic    Discussions in this Topic