UKMarkw
Sergeant
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2012
- Location
- Portsmouth, England
How often were the tariffs mentioned in the secession documents?
The tariff was mentioned in the secession documents of several of the southern states including South Carolina where the war first began.
Didn't Georgia say the tariff issue had been resolved in it's secession document?
And how does the tariff effect the constitutionality of secession?
The Georgia Declaration of Secession doesn't actually state that the tariff issue had been resolved. It mentions that as a result of the tariff of 1846 that “the principle was settled, and free trade, low duties, and economy in public expenditures was the verdict of the American people”. However, in the following paragraph, it mentions that this verdict was now being threatened : “All these classes saw this and felt it and cast about for new allies”. This is a reference to the coalition that had been forged between the advocates of trade protectionism and anti-slavery groups under the banner of the novice Republican Party. My previous post may have been off topic from the original post concerning the constitutionality of secession. However, I was only responding to a question from a poster but thanks for your comments anyway.Didn't Georgia say the tariff issue had been resolved in it's secession document?
And how does the tariff effect the constitutionality of secession?
The Georgia Declaration of Secession doesn't actually state that the tariff issue had been resolved. It mentions that as a result of the tariff of 1846 that “the principle was settled, and free trade, low duties, and economy in public expenditures was the verdict of the American people”. However, in the following paragraph, it mentions that this verdict was now being threatened : “All these classes saw this and felt it and cast about for new allies”. This is a reference to the coalition that had been forged between the advocates of trade protectionism and anti-slavery groups under the banner of the novice Republican Party. My previous post may have been off topic from the original post concerning the constitutionality of secession. However, I was only responding to a question from a poster but thanks for your comments anyway.
This matter was referred to in the Georgia Declaration of Secession in 1861 and Senator Robert Toombs's Speech to the Georgia Legislature, Nov. 13, 1860.
I don't know much about a right but I think if it's the will of the people and it's voted on then secession is a right just like we did with England.Why do posters here feel compelled to argue again and again and again about whether secession was a constitutional right?
It's not as if anyone's reached a definitive decision that's widely accepted.
Isn't it enough to say that Americans at the time disagreed over whether there was a constitutional right of secession, and, as so many arguments were cast in terms of constitutionality and original intent, that the inability of people at the time to reach a generally-agreed upon conclusion contributed to the events leading up to the secession crisis and the decision for war in 1860-61?
I think there would have been a separatist movement in any case. It isn't as if the fire-eaters would have been deterred in their quest for securing southern independence by a finding that secession was unconstitutional. The crisis they fears was upon the South was far too important to be dismissed due to constitutional interpretation.
After all, even if someone here finally offered an explanation that satisfied everyone, how would that change a single thing about what happened over 150 years ago?
These debates never end, and they never will. We might thus realize that the same was true for the Civil War generation.
We didn't vote on anything.I don't know much about a right but I think if it's the will of the people and it's voted on then secession is a right just like we did with England.
Exactly. The United States and its current civilization was forged by the sword, not by legislation, legal stuff, not by diplomacy but by naked force.
I'm not aware that the colonial secessionists asked permission from the king, parliament, or even the loyal colonists for permission to form their own country
I don't know much about a right but I think if it's the will of the people and it's voted on then secession is a right just like we did with England.
I'm not aware that the colonial secessionists asked permission from the king, parliament, or even the loyal colonists for permission to form their own country
Although the words 'secede', 'secession' and 'secessionist' predate the activities of 1860-61 by over a hundred years, it is incorrect to use them to describe the American Revolution. Our Founders were unmistakenly rebelling against the monolithic, monarchial government: they were not trying to withdraw from a federation of States.I'm not aware that the colonial secessionists
Actually, the American Revolution was a form of secession because it involved the 13 American colonies seceding or withdrawing from the United Kingdom to form the United States of America.
Although the words 'secede', 'secession' and 'secessionist' predate the activities of 1860-61 by over a hundred years, it is incorrect to use them to describe the American Revolution. Our Founders were unmistakenly rebelling against the monolithic, monarchial government: they were not trying to withdraw from a federation of States.
Thanks for your response.What difference does it make? First rebellious colonists and then decades later rebellious Southerners withdrew from what they regarded as repressive governments to form nations of their own. Neither people sought or got permission, neither group thought that those opposed had the right to decide for them.