Study Notes on South Carolina Secession Declaration
Declaration by the People of the State of South Carolina (April 26, 1852)
Context of the Declaration
The declaration was made by the representatives of South Carolina, assembled in convention.
Date: April 26, 1852.
Reason for Declaration: Frequent violations of the Constitution of the United States by the Federal Government and its encroachments on the reserved rights of the states.
Justification: The state felt justified in withdrawing from the Federal Union but chose to refrain out of respect for the opinions of other slaveholding states at that time.
Noted increase in federal encroachments since the initial forbearance ceased to be virtuous.
Historical Background
In 1765, the British Empire sought to impose laws on the thirteen American Colonies, leading to a struggle for self-governance.
Outcome: Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, asserting that the Colonies had the right to be free and independent states.
Key tenet established: When a government becomes destructive of its foundational purpose, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it and institute a new government.
Post-declaration: Each colony asserted its sovereignty, creating its constitution, and appointing government officials while uniting for common defense under the Articles of Confederation (1778).
Sovereignty of States
The Articles of Confederation highlighted the sovereignty, freedom, and independence of each state.
The new U.S. Constitution (1787) was adopted after states agreed to it, asserting that each state remains sovereign.
An amendment was included clarifying that powers not delegated to the United States or prohibited to states are reserved for the states or the people.
The Law of Compact
The Constitution's formation is governed by the principle of mutual obligation in every compact.
If one party fails to fulfill a material part of an agreement, the other party is released from its obligations.
Violation of Constitutional Obligations
South Carolina claims fourteen states have knowingly failed to uphold their constitutional obligations.
The Constitution, Article IV, states that persons held for labor escaping to another state cannot be discharged due to local laws but must be returned.
Non-slaveholding states' hostility towards slavery has led them to ignore this obligation.
Hostility Against Slavery
Northern states enacted laws that nullify federal law regarding fugitive slaves, effectively breaking the constitutional compact.
The right of property in slaves is recognized through distinct political rights given to their owners, including representation and taxation provisions (three-fifths compromise).
Non-slaveholding states are denying the rights of property recognized by the Constitution and labeling slavery as sinful.
Actions of Northern States
Northern states supported organizations aimed at disturbing the peace and property of South Carolinians.
Agitation against slavery has persisted for twenty-five years, aiding in an eventual takeover of government power.
A sectional party emerged, increasingly hostile to southern interests, and elected a president whose views oppose slavery.
President’s stance: The government cannot sustain itself as half slave and half free, advocating for the ultimate extinction of slavery.
Implications for Southern States
The election of this sectional party threatens the Southern states’ self-governance and safety.
It is believed that the guarantees of the Constitution will vanish, denying equal rights and the ability to protect their interests.
Conclusion of the Declaration
The Declaration emphasizes the profound grievances South Carolina has with the federal government and non-slaveholding states.
Declares the necessity for self-protection and self-government amidst perceived threats against their constitutional rights and existence as a sovereign state.
The mid-19th century saw various efforts by different groups of people to secure what they perceived as a better life. From the perspective of the Declaration by the People of the State of South Carolina (April 26, 1852), the people of South Carolina sought to secure a better life by upholding states' sovereignty and preserving the institution of slavery. They viewed the maintenance of their self-governance and property rights in slaves as fundamental to their well-being. Their efforts involved articulating their grievances against the Federal Government, asserting their right to withdraw from the Union due to perceived constitutional violations, and defending their economic and social structure which relied heavily on slave labor.
The political consequences and controversies of these pursuits, particularly in the antebellum period, are extensively detailed in the South Carolina Declaration. The flight from slavery directly exacerbated political divides, as seen in the controversy over fugitive slaves. The Constitution, specifically Article IV, mandated the return of persons held for labor escaping to another state. However, the Declaration claims that "non-slaveholding states' hostility towards slavery has led them to ignore this obligation" and that these Northern states even "enacted laws that nullify federal law regarding fugitive slaves." South Carolina viewed this as a clear breach of the constitutional compact, denying the property rights of slave owners, rights recognized through provisions like the three-fifths compromise for representation and taxation. This conflict over federal law enforcement and states' defiance deepened the chasm between the North and South.
While the Declaration doesn't explicitly refer to mid-century "war," it lays the groundwork for it by detailing the profound political crises. The document describes how "agitation against slavery has persisted for twenty-five years" and led to the emergence of "a sectional party…increasingly hostile to southern interests." The election of a president whose views were unequivocally opposed to slavery—advocating for its "ultimate extinction"—was seen as an existential threat. This political development, borne from the sustained pursuit of different visions of a "better life" (emancipation in the North vs. preservation of slavery in the South), created an irreconcilable divide. South Carolina's declaration of intent to withdraw from the Federal Union, initially withheld out of respect for other slaveholding states but increasingly considered, highlights the severity of these political consequences.
Ultimately, the pursuit of opportunities and freedoms in the 1850s definitively shaped a deep-seated sectional divide. For the Southern states, particularly South Carolina, their opportunity and freedom were inextricably tied to the maintenance of slavery and states' rights, allowing them to govern themselves without federal interference. They feared that the election of a president from a "sectional party" meant that the "guarantees of the Constitution will vanish," denying them equal rights and the ability to protect their interests. Conversely, for many in the North, the pursuit of freedom for enslaved people and the opportunity for national expansion without the extension of slavery became paramount. These clashing interpretations of fundamental American principles—opportunity, freedom, constitutional rights, and self-governance—fueled the political rhetoric and actions described in the Declaration, pushing the nation towards an inevitable confrontation by illuminating two fundamentally different visions for the country's future.