Georgia Secession
The
people of Georgia having
dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America,
present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the
separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of
complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to
the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to
disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply
with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that
property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven
to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic.
This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every
circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the
hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union
for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still
attached to the Union from habit and national
traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would
bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and
dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated
the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm
hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to
the rule of the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large
majority committed the Government of the United States into their hands. The
people of Georgia,
after an equally full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have
declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over them. A brief
history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political
organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has
been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The
party of Lincoln,
called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of
recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to
itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of
condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial
restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in
the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose.
By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state. The question of slavery was
the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution.
While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African
race was fully conceded by all, it was plainly apparent that slavery would soon
disappear from what are now the non-slave-holding States of the original
thirteen. The opposition to slavery was then, as now, general in those States
and the Constitution was made with direct reference to
that fact. But a distinct abolition party was not formed in the United States
for more than half a century after the Government went into operation. The main
reason was that the North, even if united, could not control both branches of
the Legislature during any portion of that time. Therefore such an organization
must have resulted either in utter failure or in the total overthrow of the
Government. The material prosperity of the North was greatly dependent on the
Federal Government; that of the the South not at all.
In the first years of the Republic the navigating, commercial, and
manufacturing interests of the North began to seek profit and aggrandizement at
the expense of the agricultural interests. Even the owners of fishing smacks
sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet
continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The
navigating interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and
against competition in the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and
by prohibitory acts gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their
interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with
these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate
burden of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have
succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of
their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above $2,000,000
annually for the support of these objects. Theses interests, in connection with
the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of
subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their
business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the
public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency. The manufacturing
interests entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for
Government bounties and special favors. This interest was confined mainly to
the Eastern and Middle non-slave-holding States. Wielding these great States it
held great power and influence, and its demands were in full proportion to its
power. The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special
facts and reasons rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified
much of the opposition of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor
the infancy of their business in this country, the scarcity of labor and
capital, the hostile legislation of other countries toward them, the great
necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the necessity of high duties
to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence. These reasons prevailed,
and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general acquiescence
of the whole country.
But when these reasons
ceased they were no less clamorous for Government protection, but their clamors
were less heeded-- the country had put the principle of protection upon trial
and condemned it. After having enjoyed protection to the extent of from 15 to
200 per cent. upon their entire business for above thirty years, the act of
1846 was passed. It avoided sudden change, but the principle was settled, and
free trade, low duties, and economy in public expenditures was the verdict of
the American people. The South and the Northwestern States
sustained this policy. There was but small hope of its reversal; upon the
direct issue, none at all.
All these classes saw this
and felt it and cast about for new allies. The anti-slavery sentiment of the
North offered the best chance for success. An anti-slavery party must
necessarily look to the North alone for support, but a united North was now
strong enough to control the Government in all of its departments, and a
sectional party was therefore determined upon. Time and issues upon slavery
were necessary to its completion and final triumph. The feeling of
anti-slavery, which it was well known was very general among the people of the
North, had been long dormant or passive; it needed only a question to arouse it
into aggressive activity. This question was before us. We had acquired a large
territory by successful war with Mexico; Congress had to govern it;
how, in relation to slavery, was the question then demanding solution. This
state of facts gave form and shape to the anti-slavery sentiment throughout the
North and the conflict began. Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted
the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation
and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end. This
insulting and unconstitutional demand was met with great moderation and
firmness by the South. We had shed our blood and paid our money for its
acquisition; we demanded a division of it on the line of the Missouri restriction or an equal
participation in the whole of it. These propositions were refused, the
agitation became general, and the public danger was great. The case of the
South was impregnable. The price of the acquisition was the blood and treasure
of both sections-- of all, and, therefore, it belonged to all upon the
principles of equity and justice.
The Constitution
delegated no power to Congress to excluded either party from its free
enjoyment; therefore our right was good under the Constitution. Our
rights were further fortified by the practice of the Government from the
beginning. Slavery was forbidden in the country northwest of the Ohio River by what is called the ordinance of 1787.
That ordinance was adopted under the old confederation and by the assent of
Virginia, who owned and ceded the country, and therefore this case must stand
on its own special circumstances. The Government of the United States claimed territory by virtue of the
treaty of 1783 with Great
Britain, acquired territory by cession from Georgia and North Carolina,
by treaty from France, and
by treaty from Spain.
These acquisitions largely exceeded the original limits of the Republic. In all
of these acquisitions the policy of the Government was uniform. It opened them
to the settlement of all the citizens of all the States of the Union. They emigrated thither with their property of every
kind (including slaves). All were equally protected by public authority in
their persons and property until the inhabitants became sufficiently numerous
and otherwise capable of bearing the burdens and performing the duties of
self-government, when they were admitted into the Union upon equal terms with
the other States, with whatever republican constitution they might adopt for
themselves.
Under this equally just and
beneficent policy law and order, stability and progress, peace and prosperity
marked every step of the progress of these new communities until they entered
as great and prosperous commonwealths into the sisterhood of American States.
In 1820 the North endeavored to overturn this wise and successful policy and
demanded that the State of Missouri should not
be admitted into the Union unless she first
prohibited slavery within her limits by her constitution. After a bitter and
protracted struggle the North was defeated in her special object, but her
policy and position led to the adoption of a section in the law for the
admission of Missouri, prohibiting slavery in all that portion of the territory
acquired from France lying North of 36 [degrees] 30 [minutes] north latitude
and outside of Missouri. The venerable Madison
at the time of its adoption declared it unconstitutional. Mr. Jefferson
condemned the restriction and foresaw its consequences and predicted that it
would result in the dissolution of the Union.
His prediction is now history. The North demanded the application of the
principle of prohibition of slavery to all of the territory acquired from Mexico and all
other parts of the public domain then and in all future time. It was the
announcement of her purpose to appropriate to herself all the public domain
then owned and thereafter to be acquired by the United States. The claim itself was
less arrogant and insulting than the reason with which she supported it. That
reason was her fixed purpose to limit, restrain, and finally abolish slavery in
the States where it exists. The South with great unanimity declared her purpose
to resist the principle of prohibition to the last extremity. This particular
question, in connection with a series of questions affecting the same subject,
was finally disposed of by the defeat of prohibitory legislation.
The Presidential election of
1852 resulted in the total overthrow of the advocates of restriction and their
party friends. Immediately after this result the anti-slavery portion of the
defeated party resolved to unite all the elements in the North opposed to
slavery an to stake their future political fortunes upon their hostility to
slavery everywhere. This is the party two whom the people of the North have
committed the Government. They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely
defeated. They entered the Presidential contest again in 1860 and succeeded.
The prohibition of slavery
in the Territories, hostility to it everywhere, the equality of the black and
white races, disregard of all constitutional guarantees it its favor, were
boldly proclaimed by its leaders and applauded by its followers.
With these principles on
their banners and these utterances on their lips the majority of the people of
the North demand that we shall receive them as our rulers.
The prohibition of slavery
in the Territories is the cardinal principle of this organization.
For forty years this
question has been considered and debated in the halls of Congress, before the
people, by the press, and before the tribunals of justice. The majority of the
people of the North in 1860 decided it in their own favor. We refuse to submit
to that judgment, and in vindication of our refusal we offer the Constitution
of our country and point to the total absence of any express power to exclude
us. We offer the practice of our Government for the first thirty years of its
existence in complete refutation of the position that any such power is either
necessary or proper to the execution of any other power in relation to the
Territories. We offer the judgment of a large minority of the people of the
North, amounting to more than one-third, who united with the unanimous voice of
the South against this usurpation; and, finally, we offer the judgment of the
Supreme Court of the United
States, the highest judicial tribunal of our
country, in our favor. This evidence ought to be conclusive that we have never
surrendered this right. The conduct of our adversaries admonishes us that if we
had surrendered it, it is time to resume it.
The faithless conduct of our
adversaries is not confined to such acts as might aggrandize themselves or
their section of the Union. They are content
if they can only injure us. The Constitution declares that persons
charged with crimes in one State and fleeing to another shall be delivered up
on the demand of the executive authority of the State from which they may flee,
to be tried in the jurisdiction where the crime was committed. It would appear
difficult to employ language freer from ambiguity, yet for above twenty years
the non-slave-holding States generally have wholly refused to deliver up to us
persons charged with crimes affecting slave property. Our confederates, with punic faith, shield and give sanctuary to all criminals who
seek to deprive us of this property or who use it to destroy us. This clause of
the Constitution has no other sanction than their good faith; that is withheld
from us; we are remediless in the Union; out
of it we are remitted to the laws of nations.
A similar provision of the Constitution
requires them to surrender fugitives from labor. This provision and the one
last referred to were our main inducements for confederating with the Northern
States. Without them it is historically true that we would have rejected the Constitution.
In the fourth year of the Republic Congress passed a law to give full vigor and
efficiency to this important provision. This act depended to a considerable
degree upon the local magistrates in the several States for its efficiency. The
non-slave-holding States generally repealed all laws intended to aid the
execution of that act, and imposed penalties upon those citizens whose loyalty
to the Constitution and their oaths might induce them
to discharge their duty. Congress then passed the act of 1850, providing for the complete
execution of this duty by Federal officers. This law, which their own bad faith
rendered absolutely indispensible for the protection
of constitutional rights, was instantly met with ferocious revilings
and all conceivable modes of hostility. The Supreme Court unanimously, and
their own local courts with equal unanimity (with the single and temporary
exception of the supreme court of Wisconsin), sustained its constitutionality
in all of its provisions. Yet it stands to-day a dead letter for all
practicable purposes in every non-slave-holding State in the Union.
We have their convenants, we have their oaths to keep
and observe it, but the unfortunate claimant, even accompanied by a Federal
officer with the mandate of the highest judicial authority in his hands, is
everywhere met with fraud, with force, and with legislative enactments to
elude, to resist, and defeat him. Claimants are murdered with impunity;
officers of the law are beaten by frantic mobs instigated by inflammatory
appeals from persons holding the highest public employment in these States, and
supported by legislation in conflict with the clearest provisions of the Constitution,
and even the ordinary principles of humanity. In several of our confederate
States a citizen cannot travel the highway with his servant who may voluntarily
accompany him, without being declared by law a felon and being subjected to
infamous punishments. It is difficult to perceive how we could suffer more by
the hostility than by the fraternity of such brethren.
The public law of civilized
nations requires every State to restrain its citizens or subjects from
committing acts injurious to the peace and security of any other State and from
attempting to excite insurrection, or to lessen the security, or to disturb the
tranquillity of their neighbors, and our Constitution
wisely gives Congress the power to punish all offenses against the laws of
nations.
These are sound and just
principles which have received the approbation of just men in all countries and
all centuries; but they are wholly disregarded by the people of the Northern
States, and the Federal Government is impotent to maintain them. For twenty
years past the abolitionists and their allies in the Northern States have been
engaged in constant efforts to subvert our institutions and to excite
insurrection and servile war among us. They have sent emissaries among us for
the accomplishment of these purposes. Some of these efforts have received the
public sanction of a majority of the leading men of the Republican party in the
national councils, the same men who are now proposed as our rulers. These
efforts have in one instance led to the actual invasion of one of the
slave-holding States, and those of the murderers and incendiaries who escaped
public justice by flight have found fraternal protection among our Northern
confederates.
These are the same men who
say the Union shall be preserved.
Such are the opinions and
such are the practices of the Republican party, who have been called by their
own votes to administer the Federal Government under the Constitution of the United States.
We know their treachery; we know the shallow pretenses under which they daily
disregard its plainest obligations. If we submit to them it will be our fault
and not theirs. The people of Georgia
have ever been willing to stand by this bargain, this contract; they have never
sought to evade any of its obligations; they have never hitherto sought to
establish any new government; they have struggled to maintain the ancient right
of themselves and the human race through and by that Constitution.
But they know the value of parchment rights in treacherous hands, and therefore
they refuse to commit their own to the rulers whom the North offers us. Why?
Because by their declared principles and policy they have outlawed
$3,000,000,000 of our property in the common territories of the Union; put it
under the ban of the Republic in the States where it exists and out of the
protection of Federal law everywhere; because they give sanctuary to thieves
and incendiaries who assail it to the whole extent of their power, in spite of
their most solemn obligations and covenants; because their avowed purpose is to
subvert our society and subject us not only to the loss of our property but the
destruction of ourselves, our wives, and our children, and the desolation of our
homes, our altars, and our firesides. To avoid these evils we resume the powers
which our fathers delegated to the Government of the United States, and henceforth will
seek new safeguards for our liberty, equality, security, and tranquillity.
[Approved, Tuesday, January
29, 1861]