Jefferson Davis Illustrates original relationships of the States

This is a passage from The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government by Jefferson Davis. Here he describes the period between the 
ratification of the Constitution by 11 of the 13 States, when Rhode Island and North Carolina remained independent nations. The purpose of this passage and letter between the Governor of Rhode Island and 
President George Washington was to demonstrate how individual States did in fact consider themselves sovereign and independent at the time of the Ratification, and the Nationalist school of the founding of the country was a later distortion, and that the compact theory of the formation of the United States is most valid:

Jefferson Davis, 1808-1889

It is particularly to be noted that, during the intervals between the 
organization of the Federal Government under the new Constitution and the 
ratification of that Constitution by, North Carolina and Rhode Island, 
respectively, those States were absolutely independent and unconnected with any 
other political community, unless they be considered as still representing the 
"United States of America," which by the Articles of Confederation had been 
declared a "perpetual union." The other States had seceded from the former 
union—not in a body, but separately, each for itself—and had formed a new 
association, leaving these two States in the attitude of foreign though friendly 
powers. There was no claim of any right to control their action, as if they had 
been mere geographical or political divisions of one great consolidated 
community or "nation." Their accession to the Union was desired, but their 
freedom of choice in the matter was never questioned. And then it is to be 
noted, on their part, that, like the house of Judah, they refrained from any 
attempt to force the seceding sisters to return.

As illustrative of the relations existing during this period between the United 
States and Rhode Island, it may not be uninstructive to refer to a letter sent 
by the government of the latter to the President and Congress, and transmitted 
by the President to the Senate, with the following note:

"United States, September 26, 1789.

"Gentlemen of the Senate: Having yesterday received a letter written in this 
month by the Governor of Rhode Island, at the request and in behalf of the 
General Assembly of that State, addressed to the President, the Senate, and the 
House of Representatives of the eleven United States of America in Congress 
assembled, I take the earliest opportunity of laying a copy of it before you.

(Signed) "GEORGE WASHINGTON."

Some extracts from the communication referred to are annexed:

"State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, In General Assembly, 
September Session, 1789.

"To the President, the Senate, and the House of Representatives of the eleven 
United States of America in Congress assembled:

"The critical situation in which the people of this State are placed engages us 
to make these assurances, on their behalf, of their attachment and friendship to 
their sister States, and of their disposition to cultivate mutual harmony and 
friendly intercourse. They know themselves to be a handful, comparatively 
viewed, and, although they now stand as it were alone, they have not separated 
themselves or departed from the principles of that Confederation, which was 
formed by the sister States in their struggle for freedom and in the hour of 
danger....

"Our not having acceded to or adopted the new system of government formed and 
adopted by most of our sister States, we doubt not, has given uneasiness to 
them. That we have not seen our way clear to it, consistently with our idea of 
the principles upon which we all embarked together, has also given pain to us. 
We have not doubted that we might thereby
 avoid present difficulties, but we have apprehended future mischief....

"Can it be thought strange that, with these impressions, they [the people of 
this State] should wait to see the proposed system organized and in 
operation?—to see what further checks and securities would be agreed to and 
established by way of amendments, before they could adopt it as a Constitution 
of government for themselves and their posterity?...
"We are induced to hope that we shall not be altogether considered as foreigners 
having no particular affinity or connection with the United States; but that 
trade and commerce, upon which the prosperity of this State much depends, will 
be preserved as free and open between this State and the United States, as our 
different situations at present can possibly admit....

"We feel ourselves attached by the strongest ties of friendship, kindred, and 
interest, to our sister States; and we can not, without the greatest reluctance, 
look to any other quarter for those advantages of commercial intercourse which 
we conceive to be more natural and reciprocal between them and us.

"I am, at the request and in behalf of the General Assembly, your most obedient, 
humble servant.

(Signed) "John Collins, Governor.

Nullification vs. Secession, from a man who knew

It is known to Senators who have served with me here, that I have for many years advocated, as an essential attribute of State sovereignty, the right of a State to secede from the Union. Therefore, if I had not believed there was justifiable cause; if I had thought that Mississippi was acting without sufficient provocation, or without an existing necessity, I should still, under my theory of the Government, because of my allegiance to the State of which I am a citizen, have been bound by her action. I, however, may be permitted to say that I do think she has justifiable cause, and I approve of her act. I conferred with her people before that act was taken, counseled them then that if the state of things which they apprehended should exist when the convention met, they should take the action which they have now adopted.
I hope none who hear me will confound this expression of mine with the advocacy of the right of a State to remain in the Union, and to disregard its constitutional obligations by the nullification of the law. Such is not my theory.


Nullification and secession, so often confounded, are indeed antagonistic principles. 

Nullification is a remedy which it is sought to apply within the Union, and against the agent of the States. It is only to be justified when the agent has violated his constitutional obligation, and a State, assuming to judge for itself, denies the right of the agent thus to act, and appeals to the other States of the Union for a decision; but when the States themselves, and when the people of the States, have so acted as to convince us that they will not regard our constitutional rights, then, and then for the first time, arises the doctrine of secession in its practical application.

A great man who now reposes with his fathers, and who has been often arraigned for a want of fealty to the Union, advocated the doctrine of nullification, because it preserved the Union. It was because of his deep-seated attachment to the Union, his determination to find some remedy for existing ills short of a severance of the ties which bound South Carolina to the other States, that Mr. [John C.] Calhoun advocated the doctrine of nullification, which he proclaimed to be peaceful, to be within the limits of State power, not to disturb the Union, but only to be a means of bringing the agent before the tribunal of the States for their judgment.

Secession belongs to a different class of remedies. It is to be justified upon the basis that the States are sovereign. There was a time when none denied it. I hope the time may come again, when a better comprehension of the theory of our Government, and the inalienable rights of the people of the States, will prevent any one from denying that each State is a sovereign, and thus may reclaim the grants which it has made to any agent whomsoever.   


[Emphasis mine--Honourablemeans]

From the last address of then U.S. Senator Jefferson Davis (Mississippi), January 12, 1861

Read the entire speech here.