Robert Lewis Dabney was a prominent Presbyterian minister in Virginia who once served as chief of staff to Stonewall Jackson.
He was a great man who saw clearly the challenges of his time.
Jonathan White, Abbeville Institute:
In April 1861, Dabney argued that the Northern interpretation of the reserved rights of the states asserted some dubious positions: “If … a ruthless majority may perpetrate unconstitutional wrong, may trample on the sacred authority of the Supreme Court, and may pervert all the powers of the federal government, instituted for the equal good of all, to the depression of a class of rights as much recognized by the constitution as any other, and the minority have no remedy except submission; … If you mean that one party is to keep or break the compact as his arrogance, interest, or caprice, may dictate, and the other is to be held bound by it at the point of the sword; If you mean that a sovereign State is not to be the judge of its own wrong and its own redress, when all constitutional appeals have failed; Then … this much lauded federal compact a monstrous fraud; a horrid trap and we do well to free ourselves and our children from it.”[20] Dabney here presented a statement infused with States’ Rights philosophy.
The States, according to Dabney, had reserved rights, and Virginia had expressly reserved the right to resume delegated powers should the powers delegated be perverted to her injury or oppression. Virginia, Dabney wrote, “expressly reserved to herself, the right to sever its bonds, whenever she judged they were used injuriously to her covenanted rights. It was on this condition she was received into the family of States.”[21] Dabney wondered whether Virginia would “be called covenant-breaker, because she judges that the time has come to exercise her right expressly reserved?”[22] Dabney felt that Virginia’s right to determine whether the Constitution had been violated, as well as “the mode and measure of redress.” This comes right out of the Kentucky Resolutions. Virgina’s “right to go out of [the Union] whenever she judged herself injured by it, was expressly reserved, and conceded from the first.”[23] Reserved rights do not have to be expressly reserved, but Virginia had, for additional caution, expressly reserved the right to recall delegated powers. In April 1861, Virginia recalled her delegated powers and left the Union.
Finally, Dabney argued that the states had created the federal government as their servant. The “sovereign States, [were] the creators by their free act, of these federal authorities.”[24] Dabney asked his northern friend, if the states “are to be the helpless slaves, in the last resort, of their own servant?”[25]
After the war, Dabney continued these States’ Rights themes in his book The Life of Jackson. The states created the federal government: the “former colonies of Great Britain … voluntarily formed a covenant, called the Constitution …a government which was the creature of the sovereign States, acting as independent nations in forming it.”[26]
The states delegated certain enumerated powers to the federal government. “This compact conferred certain defined powers and duties upon the Central Government, for purposes common to all the States alike, and expressly reserved and prohibited the exercise of all other powers, leaving to the States the management of their own affairs. … By compact, they conceded some of the functions of an independent nation,[27] particularly defined, to the Central Government, retaining all the rest as before.”[28]
The States reserved everything not delegated to the federal government. “They did not,” according to Dabney, “sacrifice their nature as sovereignties, by acceding to the Federal Union.”[29] Echoing Jefferson, Dabney stated, “The States themselves must be the judges whether the covenant was destroyed, and judges too of the necessity and nature of their redress.”[30]
Some might try to tarnish Dabney’s legacy on matters such as race and slavery. I do not because he was a man of his time and place; and he correctly represented biblical norms and priorities in defense of his positions.
On the matter of the historic constitutional order, he was precisely right and well-spoken. And he was nearly prophetic on what the impacts would be of some of the changes that were being forced upon the states.
The factors that led southern states to secede were complex and multifaceted. These states had numerous longstanding, justified grievances against the North.
Today, we have an immense federal government wielding vast unconstitutional powers. This problem did not begin in the 1960’s, with FDR or with Woodrow Wilson. It began in the 1800’s; and the Civil War was the early, transformational event that led to our current state of affairs.
“The factors that led southern states to secede were complex and multifaceted. These states had numerous longstanding, justified grievances against the North.”
Well said, Triad. And indeed, the factors involving the South being the North’s captive colony (most seen in the abusive tariffs) were the reasons the North invaded, raped, and plundered the South. The North stated that they were not invading because of slavery–Lincoln, Congress, & northern legislatures all explicitly said that.
The States had a right to secede because they never surrendered that right. (Search the Constitution for it if you like.) They were States of a federation, not provinces of a consolidated nation. New England States considered numerous times seceding before 1860. Everyone thought it reasonable until the tyrant Lincoln’s might “made right”. Lincoln’s War occurred because he invaded the seceded Confederacy, without any Congressional declaration (he left them out of session for 3 months).
The States formed a compact with the Federal government, of which they were the creator. A compact where only one party can judge whether the compact is being kept is like a marriage where only one of the sexes may initiate a divorce. The North prevented the South’s amicable divorce by putting a gun to the South’s head.
The States’ ability to secede was originally a very good check on keeping the Federal government from becoming the oligarchic, bullying Empire it has become.
Thanks for that additional information, J. Sobran. I wonder what percentage of the American people understand the real story about the Civil War’s causes and effects. In addition to the tragedy of lives lost, we also lost the Constitutional order. The loss of liberty due to that loss affects us to this day.
Indeed, Triad. The bumper-sticker version probably prevails. The conquering victors wrote the history to a large extent, and the myth suits all the ruling class of today. Lincoln swore his oath to protect and defend the Constitution and then spit on it in at least a dozen ways.
NC, VA, Tennessee, & Arkansas declined to secede with the Deep South states. They seceded specifically because Lincoln called for troops from them to invade the states who had already seceded. They seceded specifically because of what they saw as Lincoln’s tyranny.
That’s right, J. Sobran. It should be noted that the “bumper sticker version” even prevails in Republican circles. They love their Lincoln Day dinners.
Great discussion boys. It was serendipitously timed to your post of Matt Walsh’s history of the civil war. A perfect match.
Thanks, Fred. Yes, some good content between the Abbeville Institute article and the Walsh video.