Secession was becoming a regular talk within the states during 1850s and the periods thereafter. During this time, states of the Union began to assert independence that would enable them to withdraw from the union at will. The assertion of these powers led to widespread contentions between different parties concerning the nature of the sovereignty of states in the formation of the union and their interaction with the union itself. This paper discusses whether the union and its constitutional basis was effectively a source of discord which contributed to the failure of the Union.
The United States constitution at first was found at fault regarding the nature of the states with relation to the United States. In leaving out the legal relationship between member states and the union, it left the floodgates of litigation and opinions of withdrawal open to Northern opposition. The amendments promulgated to clarify the position of the states with regards to the union were implemented too late to stop the already ongoing revolution (Document H). As president Jefferson already notes, the constitution had already proven unavailing in preventing the rise of northern claims about the ineffectiveness of the union government.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
At the same time, the constitution had failed to identify the nature of states before moving into the union and their nature after joining the union, thereby opening the leeway for opposing views. As evidenced in Abraham Lincoln’s speech, states thought themselves as independent bodies that had joined themselves to the union with the option of opting out. However, the opposing side asserted that states were only dependent non-entities that only gained the status of statehood after joining the union (Document I). As a result, such states could not claim independence outside of the union itself. The silence of the constitution effectively caused a lacuna which created unnecessary power struggles between confederation supporters and secessionists.
As a result, secessionists found opportunity to break the law, asserting that it was immoral (Document C). The constitution effectively outlawed slavery on the coast of Africa and outlawed resisting re-enslavement on union soil, effectively sowing discord among union members (Document D). Furthermore, the morality of the constitution was continually in question as an instrument for the furtherance of the people’s protection (Document E). As the silent proponent of slavery, the United States constitution ultimately brought discord among states as it provided sectional protections and left others to the mercies of nature (Document C). Notably, however, the larger part of the union was opposed to slavery, bringing on the height of the conflict (Document A).
It is however, important to consider that the constitution provided adequate remedies that would prevent the occurrence of such an occurrence. In the interests of protecting the union, the constitution provided for avenues of legislation in the states to enact legal structures that would support the social issues of the individual state before resorting to secession (Document G). Therefore, every act of secession was considered as a last resort after the failure of internal state operation towards the aversion of impending social disaster.
Despite the assertion of secessionists, asserting that no union would exist among non-slave states and slave states was effectually forcing slavery down the throats of those who opposed it (Document F). By virtue of allowing the constitution to explicitly determine slave legality in the United States, states that were opposed to the practice were put at a precarious position. In effect, therefore, the constitution was solely responsible for the divisions that came thereafter, as it empowered slavery in non-slave states and use the power of the law to enforce it. Therefore, the states equally asserted the power of the law concerning their sovereignty to determine whether or not to be members of the union.
