Customer Reviews

A Constitutional History of Secession

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

"..when the work of the lie is done, the lie will rot, the truth is great and will prevail, when none cares whether it prevails or not..." - Coventry Patmor circa 1850's.

I have ordered copies of A Constitutional History of Secession by John Remington Graham, a member of the Minnesota bar, for my sons, some friends, and the library of the high school that my sons attended. This with the hope of overcoming, with at least some, the kernel of what I believe to be Patmor's correct characterization of lie v. truth in regards to too much of our history - in this case truth as set forth in that book.

That any State had a Constitutional right to secede is undeniable, the author makes that case airtight. From the dust cover, where Professor Clyde Wilson, University of South Carolina was quoted, "Had I the power, I would require every professor of history, political science, and law in America to read Graham's work. Nowhere is there a truer and more thorough treatment of the origins and nature of freedom and self-government. This work is essential for those who would like to recover those great blessings."

If you are interested in the statesmanship of Chief Justice Taney after his dreadful opinion in the Dred Scott case; if you are interested in why the author believes Lincoln's predecessor's speech "...should be carved in stone of a conspicuous monument for the guidance of every leader who might in the future guide the destiny of a federal Union..."; if you are interested in the how and why of Stanton's undermining of McClellan "... the image given by the common lot of civil war historians, preposterous in the light of the facts, is that McCellan ..."; if you are interested in why "... the capitalists financed agitation against slavery, - not the rational arguments of Lydia Maria Child, but the vulgar appeals of Harriet Beecher Stowe, "...for they wished ..." ; if you are interested in why the Missouri Compromise was repealed and why the repeal led to war then you may agree with the author that "... Lincoln's objectives were to quiet the agitations in the North against the South, and to remove the cause of the discontent by restoration of the Missouri Compromise, which should never have been repealed at all. ..."

If you are interested in a myriad of "whys and how's", in short, if you are interested in "sovereignty of the people" v. "... States Right is simply code for slavery then or discrimination now", you must give a fair reading to A Constitutional History of Secession.

I found this book by accident. After I started reading I could not put it down! John Graham has written the most comprehensive study on the late War Between the States. He brings to light the causes of war, little know facts about the people who conducted the war to the conduct carried out by Stanton through his insane generals. After reading this book everyone will know that the United States was destroyed by the war and through the illegeal acts of President Abraham Lincoln. History, law, truth and justice were only part of the things lost during the war. The 600,000 men, untold numbers of civilians and the 8 billion dollars spent to destroy the south were a waste that can all be attributed to Lincoln. What a price was paid for the government we have today! A must read for all students of law and history. I would give ten stars if I could!

J.R. Graham has written an excellent book giving history and legal perspectives. Other reviews have made excellent observations of the content.

One reviewer erroneously commented that the book was factually flawed in that the Constitution prohibits secession. That is, of course, untrue. The section he refers to has to do with the admission of new states and a new state cannot be formed of other states without the consent of Congress. It doesn't take a book to understand the legitimacy of secession. After all, that's what the Declaration of Independence was about. If one rejects secession, one must also reject the Declaration of Independence.

The most serious flaw in the book regarded race and citizenship - a topic not really the focus of the book anyway. The author cites a judges opinion that non-whites that were free were citizens and the author generalizes this to all states. In fact, only a few states recognized non-whites as citizens. And because all privileges of citizenship had to be recognized throughout the United States, these non-white citizens could not properly be called US citizens until a new class of citizenship was created by the 14th Amendment. The author imagines that citizenship existed without voting rights (after all, white women could not vote either.) However, voting was always something required to indicate membership in the "sovereignty" and it could be established with certain qualifications - age, sex, etc. But could you imagine the possibility of prohibiting all whites from participating in government? It is clear that voting has a great bearing on the concept of citizenship.

It is abundantly clear from most state constitutions, numerous naturalization acts and court rulings that race formed an essential element of who "the people" were that formed the United States. The point is not "racism" but simply what historically a "nation" was thought to be. Even Webster's 1828 dictionary pointed out that "posterity" had to do with a "race" of decendents.

My point here is to just be clear that Dred Scott was not some exceptionally bad ruling but was actually indicitive of the overwhelming majority of thought. That to create a pluralistic, multi-nationalistic, global community of the former United States requires dealing with the past Christian history that considered race important. One way to do that is to sweep it under the rug as this author has done. But I am of the old school of dealing truthfully with the past.

The other flaw was the author's failure to recognize the full scope of the 14th Amendment's harm to America. By creating a new subject-class citizenship called a US citizen which allows even corporations to now be called US citizens, it has forever confused the original nature of state citizenship. This is well documented in court cases and even declared to be "well settled" in many others. The Utah Supreme Court wrote an excellent treatise on the 14th Amendment, exposing it's flaws in text and how it was illegally ratified.

In spite of the flaws on these off-point topics, I highly recommend this book. Unfortunately his commentary on the 14th Amendment and on citizenship does undermine his scholarship a bit.

Written by a brilliant lawyer and constitutional scholar (John Remington Graham), this book is incredibly well researched and thought provoking. There is something in this book for everyone. The historical scholar will find it amazingly thought provoking. Those with a less significant background will reflect and marvel on what was learned. The theme is the evolution of natural law as it applies to the natural and legal right of nullification and secession. Or, to put another way, the right to secede and it's firm foundation in natural law.

The book starts where students of this subject would expect, The Magna Carta of 1215 A.D.. A thorough and relatively concise foundation is built there. British common law evolves from there as ancient law and statutes are detailed in a chronological and compelling fashion. Of course, Blackstone is a primary force, and the Glorious revolution is perhaps the crowning achievement of this evolutionary period of British law and they are described well. There are many interesting subplots in the chapter, which keeps it from being too dry and legal for those not accustomed to such, thus it flows well. .

Graham then proceeds to the Colonial period and founding of the U.S., where he chronicles irrefutable evidence of the founders actions, documentation, and intentions. All of which conclude that nullification and secession were to be given rights used whenever deemed necessary by "free and independent states". Principles firmly embedded in natural law and not to be questioned. He cites many examples of words and deeds that support this. Graham provides extraordinary insight in this section.

The bulk of the book proceeds from there and flows well, 19th century post-revolution period through the civil war and then briefly reconstruction. In this largest section, Graham focuses much attention on the events and causes of the War between the States. In doing so, his detailed research breaks through many myths and will provoke much re-thinking of the subject. His account of the War itself is most comprehensive, insightful, yet relatively concise. It too, will appeal to historical scholars and novices alike. But the theme is never left behind during this section (nor any section of the book), it is continually reinforced. It is all then tied together brilliantly towards the end making the irrefutable case that the right of nullification and peaceful secession were a given before 1861. And in that context the Confederacy was based on sound legal principles that were entirely consistent with natural law and our founders intentions. And most importantly, the right to nullify or peacefully secede is still valid, and just gaining legal recognition of this right firmly based in natural law is perhaps the most constructive and rational way to retain or regain rights lost to central governments.

Finally, this is a must read for those interested in this subject. And few will be disappointed after reading it regardless

I have read and studied hundrens of books on the subject of law and government and power. None cut as concisely or authoritatively to the heart of the matter as Mr Graham's wonderful book. Quite honestly I can say that it should be a main text in any study of civivs and that if just 10% of Americans read and comprehended it seriously there would be a revolution tomorrow. What's more, the world afterward would be more just, more peaceful, and more happy than today's ersatz "America" will ever be.
If you're tired of hot wind, patriot mythology and crack-pot theories, if you hunger and thirst for justice, read this wonderful book and savour every page.

The well-documented and nobly presented information in this book shows clearly how history has been distorted and misrepresented by those who hate and have contempt for the south and the southern way of life. More importantly it restates the original intent of America's founders and the historical events in England that formed the foundation for their thought. It is clear from Mr. Graham's book and other recent texts (almost all written by northerners) that there was a profound sea change in our government that altered the nation's character and affected our international policies as well. It is often said that America resembled itself as much after the Civil War as Rome did after it was changed from a Republic to the rule of the Caesars. The basic effect of this sea change was the erosion of the sovereignty and legitimate authority of local governments and the increasing centralization of power in the hands of a few. In a phrase, it was the death of federalism. When the historical facts are reviewed without bias, as they are in Mr. Graham's book, it is clear that the southern states were not in rebellion but in protest and were the authentic defenders of sum and substance of the constitution of 1789. It was the north that was in rebellion, seizing power and sweeping the constitution aside and distorting its' meaning for the personal gain and power of the few. And so it has been ever since. The value in this book and other similar books, such as Thomas DiLorenzo's "The Real Lincoln," is not to shift blame or point fingers. Its value is in providing the evidence that dissolves the encrustation of lies and distortions to see what went wrong and why. Such an analysis is a critical first step to the badly needed restoration that will rescue America from its present condition as an undeclared oligarchy. Once we have the truth restored one other question remains: Do we have the personal and political courage to affect that needed restoration? Jefferson Davis said, "The principle for which we fight is bound to raise itself again at another time." It was principle not sectarianism that was behind the South's defense. The whole question is not that of the south against the north, but liberty against tyranny; the right and dignity of local peoples to rule themselves without the interference of black-robed oligarchs who live in the abstract vacuum of positive law and spew forth judgments based upon the relativism that is both the progenitor and spawn of positive law. Sell your bed and buy this book. It will not only illuminate the past but serve as a dependable guide to the understanding of the present and what must be done if America is to survive as a nation rooted in liberty.

The author does an outstanding job of setting forth the historical context of basis for the right of secession, going especially back into the history of England, from which we inherited most of our law and legal thought. However, at the same time, he probably spends too much time on the English history that gave our forefathers the basis for their decisions in the formation of our independent states which gave birth to the national government. Perhaps more space could have been devoted to the intermost thoughts of our founders. It is unfortunate that very few Americans have been taught the truth of the right of secession that our founders reserved to the states and how many of the warnings by some of the federalists about national government power have become true, which began
consistent movement with the Civil War.

This is really an excellent work, and the five star reviewers give credit where credit is due. For the purposes of my review, I'd like to offer that this book is worthy of five stars with the following exceptions:

- It is not really a "History" of Secession, in that Graham takes sides in the debate. It is more of a "Defense" of Secession, and a very able one at that.
- There are a couple of points in the narrative in which Graham takes minority views and doesn't adequately support them with sufficient facts. One example is his assertion that the British Empire was not ruled by the crown but by the East India Company. This is certainly plausible, but Graham does not take the time and space to adequately support this view. The "fact" is then used to support other theses later in the book. A few other like examples could be stated.
- The book gives thorough treatment to secessions in the English-speaking world, but short shrift to other, equally important, historical examples.
- The Epilogue is really a chapter on the history of the Constitution of Canada; not really an epilogue in any real sense.

Having gotten those quibbles out of my system, I'll return to my opening comment -- this is an excellent work. Graham makes an unimpeachable case that a) secession is a constitutional right, and b) that right strengthens, not weakens, a confederacy in which the right is recognized. Highly recommended for those interested in restoring liberty and republicanism in America.

I find this book to be very well written, and well documented. It provides important historical perspectives on our Constitution and is a great aid in understanding what the founding fathers intended. Excellent book!

Peaceful secession seems to be the answer to the world's worst ills. Professor Livingston convinces me with his scholarly, cogent, and practical analysis of the devolutionary process.