This decision brought home to the people of Virginia the fact that the
authorities of certain of the Northern States were violating their
obligations under the Federal Constitution, and yet the Federal
Government was unable to remedy the wrong and maintain the rights of
the injured commonwealths.
These conditions and the attitude of the Northern States which thus
nullified the provisions of the Federal Constitution undoubtedly moved
thousands of Virginians and other citizens of the South to secession.
They refused to remain members of a Union in which the rights of their
states were thus violated by their sister commonwealths.
But the claim that Virginia seceded in order to avert pecuniary loss
resulting from the non-return of fugitive slaves is negatived by the
fact that by such action she surrendered all the benefits from the
Federal Constitution and statute. In the Union, some protection was
secured to the state with respect to the rights thus menaced. Outside
of the Union, every such benefit was lost, and the state stood
absolutely without redress.
-----
Footnote 294:
See Decision in Case of Prigg _vs._ Pennsylvania, 16 Pet. 539.
Footnote 295:
_Fugitive Slaves_, McDougall, p. 66.
Footnote 296:
_In re Sherman M. Booth_, 3rd Wisconsin Rep., p. 13.
Footnote 297:
_Ableman_ vs. _Booth_ and _United States_ vs. _Booth_, 21st Howard,
p. 506.
Footnote 298:
_Journal of the General Assembly of Wisconsin_, Session 1859, pp.
463 and 865.
Footnote 299:
_History of Massachusetts in the Civil War_, Schouler, Vol. I, p. 6.
Footnote 300:
See _Reports of Thirty-second Congress, and Twenty Years of
Congress_, Blaine, pp. 258-265.
Footnote 301:
_Debates in Peace Conference Convention_, Crittenden, p. 430.
Footnote 302:
_Origin of the Late War_, Lunt, p. 217.
Footnote 303:
_Fugitive Slaves_, Boston, 1891, McDougall, p. 41.
Footnote 304:
_Kentucky against Dennison_, 24th Howard, p. 107.
Footnote 305:
_Kentucky against Dennison_, 24th Howard, p. 109.