VA-HIST Archives

Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history

VA-HIST@LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Craig Kilby <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:56:02 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (42 lines)
You must be kidding.  Federal armies of occupation were not withdrawn  
from Arkansas, North Carolina, Florida, South Carolina, Mississippi  
and Virginia until those states removed the right of secession from  
their constitutions, to name a few.  Three of those were original  
colonies though I fail to see what distinction that would make as  
opposed to the rights of any other state which had entered the union  
voluntarily.

Can you tell me where in the Constition that secession was ever  
expressly prohibited?  Of course you can't.  The concept upon which  
the nation was built in the first place was that of popoular  
sovereignty.  With the exception of Missouri, the seceeding states  
only took that action after conventions whose delegates were elected  
by the people (albeit only those entitled to vote at that time.)

  There is a immense body of work on this topic that at your  
fingertips on this topic.  One well written essay can be found here:

http://www.bonniebluepublishing.com/The%20Right%20of%20Secession-FULL% 
20PAGE%20FORMAT.htm

Craig

On Jun 27, 2008, at 1:00 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:

> With respect, can you provide specifics?  Which states "joined the  
> union in the first place with express provision that they could  
> 'opt out'?"
>
> To my knowledge, this is simply not the case for any of the  
> original thirteen states.  I doubt very much that it was true of  
> Virginia--neither Sutton nor AE Howard makes mention of it, for  
> example, and it is the kind of thing that would show up in the  
> secondary literature on Virginia constitutions.  I am open to being  
> corrected on this matter, but I'd like something more substantive  
> than mere assertion.
>

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2


LISTLVA.LIB.VA.US