Page images
PDF
EPUB

themselves to be incorporated, to melt into one; but here the vast extent of the country, and the radical differences of temperament and polity, present insuperable obstacles. Nature has forbidden the union which politicians have ordained. They might resolve to lean on hope in the future, but they see that the action of time, and the growth of numbers, have aggravated every evil; and they foresee that the operation of these causes in the future, will only add to this result. They might accept the provisions of the Constitution for its own amendment. But what amendment of laws can cure an evil really geographical? No code that man can devise will assimilate the citizen of Louisiana, or of Georgia, with the New Englander. This is an evil beyond the powers of legislation to probe, or the decisions of the Supreme Court to remedy, and it is the very root of the disease.

To the Southerner, the Union appears an artificial arrangement, wise at the time of its formation-rendered injurious now by the progress of events. All the separate States have outgrown their original Constitutions, and have altered them. What has happened to each, individually, has happened to the whole, collectively. Is it true, as some have asserted, that there is something "sacred" in the Union, that forbids the approach of human judgment? We have seen, by ample evidence, something of its practical working. There is, indeed, one union that is sacred amongst men-that of marriage. But in most of the

States this bond is readily discarded, and divorce obtained, with a levity surprising to Europeans. And when the most solemn act of union, by which man can be bound, is trifled with thus, what sanctity can there be that forbids the divorce of a political union, were there even no other ground for it than incompatibility of temper ?

To all this, it is replied, that the people of the South entered irrevocably into the Federal compact, and must remain fast bound by it. This raises the question whether secession can really be effected, without violating constitutional principles. This is one which cannot be omitted, when we are estimating the value of the Union. If this right do exist, or cannot be disproved, is there any means by which to counterbalance so dangerous a principle, should the Union be restored? Let us endeavour to discover what amount of truth there be in the assertion that secession does not violate the Constitution.

may

CHAPTER VI.

IS SECESSION A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT?

IT is the main position of those who deny the claim of the Southern States to form a government of their own, that they are bound fast by the Constitution. On the other hand, able men assert that secession is no violation of its terms. An inquiry into the subject may now appear late in the day, for the onward tide of events has swept beyond this margin of debateable ground. When secession or revolution has ripened into civil war, it may appear of little value to seek whether there were clauses in the Federal compact that should have prevented this. But there is really a future and permanent interest in the question. A strenuous effort is now in progress to maintain or restore the Union; and Mr. Seward, the prime minister of the Northern Government, asserts, that after rebellion is crushed, it will stand forth "unchanged and unchangeable." If so, the elements that now exist will continue-the rights, or imagined rights, that have proved so disastrous in their consequences at the present time. If secession be a right derivable from the Constitution by

calm, logical reasoning, it will so remain; and all know that a right, real or ideal, has a peculiar tenacity of life. Not seldom we witness men who pass a long life in the pursuit of some legal right, which, when delusive, is not the less powerful in its hold upon the mind. The pertinacity of great communities is not likely to be less enduring. Though the present assertion of the doctrine should be trampled down, nothing will extinguish the belief, if founded in truth and on grounds that continue in existence. There appear to be two ways in which this insidious danger may be obviated; but before considering them, we must endeavour to determine whether the asserted right be a truth or a delusion.

The inquiry is one of some difficulty, for the Constitution of the United Sates ordains the most complex system of government ever in operation on a large scale. But an obstacle, really as formidable, exists in the fact that the mind of most inquirers is preoccupied with an opinion. They sit down to the evidence, having first arrived at a verdict. So far as general observation extends, we behold a single people, under a single government, one in all their relations with ourselves, acting, indeed, with extreme unanimity on all questions of public policy. The visitor to the Union observes no evidence of separate States or sovereignties. He passes through the whole country without seeing toll or barrier. He traverses a vast dominion peopled by men of remarkable uniformity

in language and appearance.

All seem to be im

pelled by the same motives, to move at a pace equally rapid, and in some respects to be more thoroughly assimilated than the inhabitants of the smallest countries of Europe. Hence arises a general impression, that the people of the United States are a single political community. Indeed, so obvious does this appear, as almost to excite impatience as if it were absurd, when we are told that, in a constitutional sense, they are distinct sovereign States-thirty-four in number, and that many of them possess more inherent power than the Federal Government which appears to be so

supreme.

But we shall at once perceive that this outward appearance may be somewhat deceptive when we find that men of the highest ability, free from any imaginable bias, express such opinions as De Tocqueville, who observes: "The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the States; and in uniting together, they have not forfeited their nationality, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. If one of the States choose to withdraw from the compact, it would be difficult to disprove its right of doing so, and the Federal Government would have no means of maintaining its claims directly, either by force or right." And the condition of facts thus described, has not apparently altered, for one of the most recent authorities, Dr. Mackay, tells us : "The Federal Government exists on sufferance

« PreviousContinue »