Brilliant Dunning
To hold the ‘establishment’ views related to the Constitution and the Civil War you must dismiss William Archibald Dunning as a racist quack because it would be too difficult to argue on the merits. In his essay The Constitution of the United States in Civil War, Dunning demonstrates the complexities and paradoxes facing the country with states seceding in a way that is both lucid and accessible. Published in 1904, the essay is required reading for anyone with a serious interest in the Constitutional questions surrounding the crisis.
It was not clear to anyone at the time what the right response was for the Federal government to a state seceding. Dunning summarizes President Buchanan’s position as a “state had no right to secede, and the federal government had no right to prevent it from seceding.” Dunning shows that the complexity of shared sovereignty led Buchanan to this conclusion which was reasonable.
“Though the ultra state-rights school of Calhoun had given a perfectly clear and definite solution to the problem, and Webster on the other hand had been equally explicit in his contradictory answer, it must be admitted that the general course of governmental action, and more important still, perhaps, the prevailing sentiment of the people as a whole, had followed the middle line of which the conservative Madison was a conspicuous adviser”.
Dunning’s contention is that the “spheres” of sovereignty had never been fully defined and that each time there was a conflict a compromise was reached that kicked the can down the road, which was Buchanan’s suggestion to Congress. The “President’s only recommendation being an explanatory amendment to the constitution. The amendment, he thought, should deal not with the fundamental question, but with the status of slavery” to again compromise and restore “peace and harmony”.
The perfect and sacred Constitution had issues and a leader of the highest caliber was required to navigate the country through the mess. In the next essay we will see what Dunning says about Congress’ response.
