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 1788--and the Constitution of 1787 superceded the earlier structure.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 > >