South Carolina Declaration of Secession

• 1. Convention And Drafting Process

  ›

  The secession convention of South Carolina convened in December 1860 following the election of Abraham Lincoln. A committee of seven members drafted the official declaration on behalf of the state. Christopher G. Memminger served as the primary author and led this specific group. Other committee members included F. H. Wardlaw, R. W. Barnwell, J. P. Richardson, B. H. Rutledge, J. E. Jenkins, and P. E. Duncan. The convention had previously agreed to draft a separate statement summarizing their justification for leaving the Union. They issued an Ordinance of Secession on December 20, which was brief and legalistic. This ordinance accomplished the actual withdrawal but contained no explanation of reasoning. The committee produced the Declaration of Immediate Causes on the 24th of December 1860. The document was adopted by the convention later that same day. The state legislature called the convention in the month following Lincoln's election victory.

  124

• 2. Legal Compact Theory Arguments

  ›

  South Carolina asserted that its right to secede was implicit within the Constitution itself. The declaration stated that this right was explicitly reaffirmed by the state in 1852. It argued that the agreement between South Carolina and the United States operated under the law of compact. This theory created obligations binding both parties to the contract. If either party failed to uphold these obligations, the agreement would be revoked. The text claimed the federal government had failed to uphold its duties toward the state. It also cited other states' refusal to enforce specific constitutional clauses protecting slavery. The argument relied heavily on the idea that the Constitution was a contract rather than a permanent union. Northern states were accused of violating terms they had originally agreed to sign. This breach of contract justified South Carolina's decision to withdraw from the federation. The document emphasized that sovereignty resided with the individual states before delegation occurred.

  25

• 3. Fugitive Slave Act Enforcement Failures

  ›

  The declaration identified the refusal of northern states to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act as a primary grievance. Article IV, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution required states to deliver persons held in service or labor back to their origin. South Carolinians viewed this failure as a direct violation of the national compact. They pointed out that some states actively worked to abolish slavery despite constitutional protections. The text described increasing hostility from non-slaveholding states toward the institution of slavery. A geographical line had been drawn across the Union separating slave and free states. All states north of this line united in electing a president hostile to slavery. This political shift made the situation unacceptable after twenty-five years of existing problems. The convention argued that the federal government could not protect slavery if its own citizens refused to return escaped slaves. This enforcement gap became the central justification for leaving the United States.

  25

• 4. Lincoln Election As Catalyst

  ›

  Abraham Lincoln's election served as the immediate trigger for South Carolina's secession decision. The state convention met on a platform opposing the expansion of slavery into new territories. Although Lincoln is not mentioned by name in the document, his opposition was clear. He declared his stance against extending slavery to areas outside existing slave states. The declaration stated that all states north of a specific geographical line elected him. His opinions and purposes were explicitly described as hostile to slavery. This election broke a long-standing balance that had existed for decades. The situation became unacceptable immediately following his victory in November 1860. The convention resolved to act quickly after learning of the results. They issued the Ordinance of Secession just four days after the election results were confirmed. The timing linked the political outcome directly to the decision to withdraw from the Union.

  23

• 5. Comparison To Declaration Of Independence

  ›

  The text drew an analogy between this proclamation and the U.S. Declaration of Independence from 1776. However, it omitted key phrases found in the American founding document. The phrase all men are created equal does not appear anywhere in the South Carolina text. It also excluded references to rights endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. The concept of consent of the governed was similarly absent from the declaration. Professor Harry V. Jaffa noted this omission as significant in his 2000 book A New Birth of Freedom. He argued that secessionist South Carolinians did not believe in those ideals due to racist views. The rhetorical structure mirrored the earlier document but removed its universal human equality claims. This difference highlighted the specific pro-slavery nature of the new state's justification. The omission served to distinguish their cause from the original American revolution.

  6

• 6. Post War Historical Interpretations

  ›

  Later claims suggested the South Carolina decision stemmed from issues like tariffs and taxes. These economic factors were not mentioned at all in the original declaration. The only reference to taxation involved how the Constitution counted slaves as three-fifths of a person for direct tax rates. Modern historical debates now distinguish these declared causes from post-war narratives. The primary focus remained on perceived constitutional violations regarding escaped slaves. Northern states were accused of actively working to abolish slavery rather than just opposing expansion. Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas issued similar declarations following South Carolina's example. They adopted the same arguments about sovereignty and compact theory. The convention resolved to print 15,000 copies of the documents for distribution. Robert Barnwell Rhett wrote a third address calling on other slaveholding states to join the movement. The legacy of the text centers on slavery enforcement failures rather than economic policy disputes.