distinguished gathering. In his physical and intellectual prime, he was the perfect flower of manhood; and keyed for the great fight which was shortly to begin, he was in very truth the impassioned Mirabeau. Lined upon the same side with him, were Thomas R. R. Cobb, Eugenius A. Nisbet, Augustus W. Reese and Francis S. Bartow. But, on the other side, were Alexander and Linton Stephens, Hiram Warner, Herschel V. Johnson and Benjamin H. Hill. These were the great leaders; but scarcely less distinguished were a score of others. Looking over this sea of anxious faces, whose grave calm foretells the coming storm, it is easy to recognize the following notables :

Alfred H. Colquitt, Henry L. Benning, Hiram P. Bell, Richard H. Clark, Nathaniel M. Crawford, Samuel Hall, Henry R. Jackson, D. P. Hill, L. J. Glenn, D. C. Campbell, Augustus H. Kenan, William T. Wofford, Henry D. McDaniel, Washington Poe, David J. Bailey, William H. Dabney, W. M. Browne, Goode Bryan, William B. Fleming, Henry R. Harris, H. R. Casey, T. M. Furlow, Alexander Means, C. J. Munnerlyn, Willis A. Hawkins, Augustus H. Hansell, P. W. Alexander, S. B. Spencer, J. P. Logan, N. A. Carswell, Carey W. Styles, John L. Harris, Thomas P. Stafford and Parmedus Reynolds. To quote Ex-Gov. Allen D. Candler's careful analysis of its personnel:

*

"It was probably the most representative body that ever assembled in the state. The people sent up as delegates their wisest, purest, and most conservative men, regardless of former political alignment. There came, from their respective counties, statesmen of ripest experience and most unquestioned patriotism; men who, in the cabinet and in both houses of the national Congress, had stood the peers of the greatest in the old Republic; profound jurists who had always eschewed politics and devoted their lives to the study of the constitution and the laws; ministers of religion, venerated doctors of divinity, who had grown gray in preaching the doctrine of peace on earth and good will to men; educated planters from the cotton plantations of Middle and South Georgia and the rice fields of the coast country who, by reason of their affluence, had always had abundant leisure to study public questions and who were, therefore, as well informed on these questions as their representatives in the national House and Senate; small farmers from the hills and valleys of North Georgia and the wire-grass plains of South Georgia, lineal descendants of the heroes of the first war for independence, who had never owned a slave in their lives, but lovers of liberty, independence, and equal rights, and full of the fire that animated their revolutionary ancestors when they threw off the British yoke; bankers, merchants, doctors, representatives of every class of people; all preferred Union under the constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, but none so craven as to tamely submit to the domination of a party which had denounced the constitution, reviled the Union, and defied the highest judicial tribunal in the world, without some sort of a guarantee that their honor would be respected and their rights protected. They entered upon their duties by first invoking the guidance of the God of nations and of men in their efforts to so steer the ship of state as to avoid both

*The Journal of the Secession Convention. Vol. I, p. 11.

"Confederate Records." Candler.

Scylla and Charybdis, both disunion and dishonor. Such were the men and such the manner in which they met the fearful crisis that confronted them."

Governor Brown was invited to occupy a seat on the floor of the convention. This courtesy was likewise extended to two other distinguished Georgians: Hon. Howell Cobb and Judge Charles J. Jenkins. Every recognized political leader was in attendance upon the convention. But political lines were all obliterated; party watchwords and shibboleths were all fused in the motto of D'Artagnan: "all for one and one for all."

Addresses from two state commissioners, Hon. James L. Orr, of South Carolina, and Hon. John G. Shorter, of Alabama, set forth, in eloquent terms, the action taken by these commonwealths and urged Georgia to take the same decisive step. These preliminary exhortations greatly comforted the secessionists. But the clear note of challenge also served to arouse the Unionists.

To quote Governor Candler again, there were three questions for the convention to consider: First-Has the state a right to withdraw from the Union? Second-Do the prevailing conditions require resort to so extreme a measure? Third-If these questions are determined in the affirmative, should Georgia exercise the right and secede at once, regardless of the action of any other state, or should she postpone action and wait for the co-operation of her sister Southern States.

With reference to the first question, there was a marked unanimity of opinion. All were agreed as to the abstract right of a state to secede. During the first half century of the Republic's life, there had been no denial of this right, by any party, in any section of the Union. In fact, three states, Rhode Island, New York, and North Carolina, had expressly reserved this right on becoming members of the Union. At the same time, some half dozen others, while not expressly reserving the right, had by implication recognized it on entering the Confederation. Says Governor Candler:

"In New England, where the right to peaceably withdraw was now most stubbornly denied to the Southern States, leaders of public sentiment not only claimed, but often threatened, on the hustings, on the floors of Congress, and through the press, when questions affecting the interest of their section were under discussion, to resort to what they called the 'unquestioned right of secession;' and when the bill to admit Louisiana into the Union was under discussion in Congress, a distinguished son of Massachusetts (Josiah 'Quincy), declared that if the bill should pass 'it was his deliberate judgment that it would be virtually a dissolution of the Union and would free the states from their moral obligations; and as it would be the right of all, so it would be the duty of some, definitely to prepare for a separation, amicably if they can, violently if they must.' Indeed, at that time, when the Republic was young and many of those who had taken a part in its establishment were still living, we hear of but few anywhere, North or South, who denied this right to the states."*

With respect to the second question above indicated, the convention

*""Confederate Records," Vol. I, pp. 12-13.

was likewise almost a unit. The republican party had not only elected a President but had secured half the seats in both houses of Congress. This party was distinctly inimical to slavery. It denied to the people of the South an equality of rights in the territories. It had trampled upon the Constitution. It had defied the Supreme Court of the United States. It had sought in every way to nullify the Fugitive Slave law. It had preached fanaticism. It had reddened with blood the soil of Kansas. It had canonized John Brown; and from such a party, however sugar-coated its platform in 1860, when votes were in demand, there was nothing to be expected by the South; and its success at the polls meant the defeat of constitutional government.

But while the convention was united on two of these questions, it was hopelessly divided on the last. This concerned the wisdom of immediate secession, irrespective of other states. It was Judge Nisbet who precipitated a debate upon this issue by introducing his famous resolutions, declaring that "in the opinion of this convention, it is the right and duty of Georgia to secede from the present Union and to co-operate with such of the other states as have or shall do the same, for the purpose of forming a Southern Confederacy, upon the basis of the Constitution of the United States." These same resolutions also called for the appointment of a committee to report an ordinance of secession.*

In lieu of this proposed action, ex-Gov. Herschel V. Johnson offered his equally famous substitute. It breathed a spirit of resistance, rehearsed the story of repeated wrongs from which the South had long suffered, and dealt in no lukewarm language with the dangers which menaced free institutions, but in the interest of some unanimity of action it advocated a convention of all the Southern States to meet in Atlanta, at a date to be selected. The gist of the substitute was dis union if necessary, but union if possible.

In support of the substitute, Governor Johnson, both the Stephenses and Benjamin H. Hill made eloquent speeches, in which it was urged that the most positive iron-clad instructions from the ballot-box could not militate against the wisdom of this sound course which was distinctly in the interest of southern rights. But Judge Nisbet, Mr. Toombs and Mr. Cobb stubbornly opposed postponement. They declared all delays to be dangerous. It was evident that both sides were actuated by the strongest love for the Union and by the deepest desire to see the wrongs from which the state was suffering fully redressed. The constitutional right of secession was not traversed; and the only difference of opinion concerned the propriety of exercising the right to accomplish the end in view. Stubbornly as the substitute was opposed, it might have carried but for the argument of Mr. Cobb, who took the position that better terms could be made outside the Union than within. It was the opinion of Mr. Stephens that the eloquent Athenian turned the tide of battle by this masterful but mistaken argument; and the fact serves to emphasize the strength of the ties which still bound Georgia to the Union. Despite Mr. Cobb's powerful argument the Secessionists

* Journal of the Secession Convention. "Confederate Records," Vol. I, pp. 229-230.

might have encountered a Waterloo had it not been for the part played by a glass of brandy in turning the scales. Before the noon recess Governor Johnson had begun a magnificent speech, fairly sweeping the convention off its feet. It was a masterful effort. The old governor was at his best. Every sentence rang like a thunderbolt hurled from the arm of Jupiter. But in the midst of its delivery Governor Johnson yielded to a motion to adjourn. During the noon recess, to revive his strength, a stimulant was taken, the effect of which was to make his brain sluggish. The interrupted speech was resumed; but the magic spell was broken. Governor Johnson's superb effort ended in an anti-climax. At last a vote was taken. Governor Johnson's substitute was rejected and Judge Nisbet's resolution was adopted by a vote of 166 yeas against 130 nays.*

This virtually settled the issue. The rest was purely formal. Patriotic solicitude for the welfare of the state in this solemn crisis was too deep to admit of any demonstration which was not tempered by the gravest decorum; but the excitement was most intense. It is not always the strongest and deepest passion whose force is vented in trumpet tones of thunder. Sometimes the wildest waves of emotion break only against the breast; and such was the profound feeling which characterized most of the delegates to the secession convention, that even the victors were awed into silence by a triumph whose sequel no seer could foretell.

The adoption of Judge Nisbet's resolution necessitated, at this stage of the proceedings, the appointment of an ordinance committee of seventeen members and the delegates named were: Eugenius A. Nisbet, chairman; Robert Toombs, Herschel V. Johnson, Francis S. Bartow, Henry L. Benning, W. M. Browne, G. D. Rice, R. H. Trippe, T. R. R. Cobb, A. H. Kenan, A. H. Stephens, D. P. Hill, B. H. Hill, E. W. Chastain, A. H. Colquitt and Augustus Reese.

It will be observed that secessionists and anti-secessionists both were put upon the committee. This was because the sovereign voice of Georgia had spoken; and it was logically expected that both parties should unite in shaping the ordinance which was to constitute Georgia's declaration of independence. Judge Nisbet drafted the ordinance which was duly reported to the convention, declaring the ordinance of 1788 to be rescinded and the State of Georgia to be in full possession of her sovereign rights. This document deserves to be reproduced in full. Its importance as a state paper is of the highest character. Besides, the part which it played in this historic drama will invest it with a fascinating interest for all time to come. It severed the tie of allegiance and made Georgia an independent republic. The ordinance was as follows: t

"AN ORDINANCE

"To dissolve the Union between the State of Georgia and other states united with her under a compact of government entitled: "The Constitution of the United States of America.'

"We, the people of the State of Georgia, in Convention assembled, do

* Journal of the Secession Convention. "Confederate Records." Candler. Vol. I, p. 236.

Journal of the Secession Convention. "Confederate Records." Candler. Vol. I, p. 251.

declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained: That the ordinance adopted by the people of the State of Georgia in Convention, on the second day of January, in the year of our Lord seventeen hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was assented to, ratified and adopted; and also all acts and parts of acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying and adopting amendments of the said Constitution are hereby repealed, rescinded and abrogated.

"We do further declare and ordain: That the Union now subsisting between the State of Georgia and other states, under the name of 'The United States of America,' is hereby dissolved, and that the State of Georgia is in the full possession and exercise of all those rights of sovereignty which belong and appertain to a free and sovereign state."

Before the question was put upon the passage of the ordinance Mr. Hill made one more final effort to save the day for the anti-secessionists by moving in lieu thereof the adoption of Governor Johnson's substitute; and on the motion the vote stood yeas 133, nays 164, showing slight variations in the figures but no essential change in the result. Judge Nisbet then moved the adoption of the committee's ordinance. All hope of keeping Georgia within the Union being lost, many of the anti-secessionists supported the ordinance and the ballot stood 208 yeas and 89 nays, forty-four anti-secessionists having joined the secession camp. On this last ballot Mr. Hill voted for the ordinance; but Mr. Stephens, Judge Warner and Governor Johnson still demurred.

But the ordinance was eventually signed by all the members of the secession convention, only six of the whole number signing the document under protest. The dissenters were: James P. Simmons, Thomas M. McRae, F. H. Latimer, David Welchel, P. M. Bird and James Simmons. This formal act of attesting the document was consummated in the presence of the governor, statehouse officers and judges. The great seal of the state was attached and the eventful scene was invested with all the solemnity which attended the signing of the immortal scroll, amid the blazing bonfires of Philadelphia in 1776.

It has been observed that a grave sense of responsibility tempered somewhat the demonstration of applause with which the members of the convention themselves greeted the passage of the ordinance of secession. But this restraint was not shared by the multitudes at large, to whom the news of the convention's action came like the spark which ignites the powder fuse and explodes the shell. All over Georgia the news was borne on the crests of wild flames and voiced in the brazen accents of delirious bells.

But among the riotous multitudes there were many sad-hearted men who, while loyal to Georgia, deplored the necessity which had forced this radical step. They were willing to share the fortunes of Georgia for weal or for woe, but they felt more like weeping than rejoicing when they looked back upon the old union and thought of the blood which had sprinkled the doorposts and the lintels. Perhaps they also glanced ahead and caught sickening sight of the crimson holocaust. But the die was cast. Georgia had spoken the word which meant separation. Not