Correct to read IX and X Amendments.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Walter Waddell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history" 
<[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: New Subject Va Almost Got It Right 06191726Z07


>I don't mean to imply that a request for secession would win. The process 
>of asking to secede is legally viable under X and XI Amendments -- you, the 
>state, can peacefully petition our government for anything. Practically, 
>secession is "dead" for our times. Don't count on that should you find a 
>way back several centuries hence.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Kiracofe" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 1:12 PM
> Subject: Re: New Subject Va Almost Got It Right
>
>
> 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 1788--and the Constitution of 1787 superceded the earlier structure.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.
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 269.9.1/854 - Release Date: 6/19/2007 
> 1:12 PM
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.472 / Virus Database: 
> 269.9.1/854 - Release Date: 6/19/2007 1:12 PM
>
>