First Inaugural Address | Page 4

rescind it?
Descending from these general principles, we find the proposition that
in legal contemplation the Union is perpetual confirmed by the history
of the Union itself. The Union is much older than the Constitution. It
was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774. It was
matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It
was further matured, and the faith of all the then thirteen States
expressly plighted and engaged that it should be perpetual, by the
Articles of Confederation in 1778. And, finally, in 1787 one of the
declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was
"TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION."
But if the destruction of the Union by one or by a part only of the States
be lawfully possible, the Union is LESS perfect than before the
Constitution, having lost the vital element of perpetuity.
It follows from these views that no State upon its own mere motion can
lawfully get out of the Union; that Resolves and Ordinances to that
effect are legally void; and that acts of violence, within any State or
States, against the authority of the United States, are insurrectionary or
revolutionary, according to circumstances.
I therefore consider that, in view of the Constitution and the laws, the
Union is unbroken; and to the extent of my ability I shall take care, as
the Constitution itself expressly enjoins upon me, that the laws of the
Union be faithfully executed in all the States. Doing this I deem to be
only a simple duty on my part; and I shall perform it so far as
practicable, unless my rightful masters, the American people, shall

withhold the requisite means, or in some authoritative manner direct
the contrary. I trust this will not be regarded as a menace, but only as
the declared purpose of the Union that it WILL Constitutionally defend
and maintain itself.
In doing this there needs to be no bloodshed or violence; and there shall
be none, unless it be forced upon the national authority. The power
confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property
and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and
imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will
be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.
Where hostility to the United States, in any interior locality, shall be so
great and universal as to prevent competent resident citizens from
holding the Federal offices, there will be no attempt to force obnoxious
strangers among the people for that object. While the strict legal right
may exist in the government to enforce the exercise of these offices, the
attempt to do so would be so irritating, and so nearly impracticable
withal, that I deem it better to forego for the time the uses of such
offices.
The mails, unless repelled, will continue to be furnished in all parts of
the Union. So far as possible, the people everywhere shall have that
sense of perfect security which is most favorable to calm thought and
reflection. The course here indicated will be followed unless current
events and experience shall show a modification or change to be proper,
and in every case and exigency my best discretion will be exercised
according to circumstances actually existing, and with a view and a
hope of a peaceful solution of the national troubles and the restoration
of fraternal sympathies and affections.
That there are persons in one section or another who seek to destroy the
Union at all events, and are glad of any pretext to do it, I will neither
affirm nor deny; but if there be such, I need address no word to them.
To those, however, who really love the Union may I not speak?
Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of our
national fabric, with all its benefits, its memories, and its hopes, would
it not be wise to ascertain precisely why we do it? Will you hazard so
desperate a step while there is any possibility that any portion of the ills
you fly from have no real existence? Will you, while the certain ills you
fly to are greater than all the real ones you fly from--will you risk the

commission of so fearful a mistake?
All profess to be content in the Union if all Constitutional rights can be
maintained. Is it true, then, that any right, plainly written in the
Constitution, has been denied? I think not. Happily the human mind is
so constituted that no party can reach to the audacity of doing this.
Think, if you can, of a single instance in which a plainly written
provision of the Constitution has ever been denied. If by the mere force