View single post by Cogswell Pepperbox
 Posted: Thu Jan 6th, 2011 08:57 am
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
Cogswell Pepperbox
Did I Fire 6 Shots or Only 5 ?

Joined: Mon Oct 4th, 2010
Posts: 28

  back to top

At issue would be the legality of Secession. If it is agreed that the Southern Confederacy of States legally and properly seceded from the Federal Union of States, then the following conflict could not, by definition, be "civil war", a war fought between two factions of the same nation.

If it is not agreed that the Confederacy's secession was legal, then the Confederacy was not a legitimate, independent nation, and the member States were in rebellion.

I'm hard-pressed to see secession as revolution, since the political leaders and institutions of the Southern States were not over-turned; the elected representatives of the governed of the States proclaimed an alteration in the political ties with the other States, with the consent of the governed. There were two separate acts, the withdrawal from the Federal Union, and then the joining of the Southern Confederacy, both done by the Legislatures of the individual States after authorization by the citizens.

Although, from Fort Mason, Texas, in January of 1861, Col. Lee wrote to Rooney: "Secession is nothing but revolution."

{that quote in context}:
"Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for “perpetual union,” so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution or the consent of all the people in convention assembled. It is idle to talk of secession."

 Close Window