Mr Waddell: Secession is not legally viable (for any state--regardless of what Texans or Vermonters or Youpers want to claim) under the United States' system of laws--someone else will have to supply the specific court case which slips my mind We went over this issue on the VA-HIST a few months ago.  

The Articles of Confederation were voided by the ratification in the states of the new Constitution--the Continental Congress (or Confederation Congress) simply ceased to meet, unable to achieve a quorum by October of 1788--and the Constitution of 1787 superceded the earlier structure.

I'm not sure who in Virginia in April 1861, with war already commenced (whether one wanted to blame Lincoln or the South Carolinians for bringing that on), believed that secession could proceed along a peaceful course, but I can imagine some politicians convincing themselves they could find a "middle way."

David Kiracofe

David Kiracofe
History
Tidewater Community College
Chesapeake Campus
1428 Cedar Road
Chesapeake, Virginia 23322
757-822-5136
>>> Walter Waddell <[log in to unmask]> 06/19/07 9:19 AM >>>
Absent violent actions against Federal officials and property, the peaceful 
process to secede remains a viable argument, but probably not a winnable one 
in the end. After all the Articles of Confederation contained the word 
"perpetual" which was "blown away" by practical needs. In 1861, Virginia was 
on the road to a "peaceful process", but the violent acts by "hot heads", 
among so many other considerations and issues for the times,  sealed it as 
null and void.

Have I stated anything that is without any substance whatsoever?


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Philip Adams" <[log in to unmask]>


> How about Vermont wanting to secede.