<span>Buchanan believed that slavery was wrong while also claiming that states did not have the right of succession. As the North and South adamantly debated whether slavery was illegal and immoral or legal and ethical, Buchanan admitted that there were certain grievenances that would make the succession justified, but then he condemed the act of slavery, saying that it was unconstitutional adn that the Founder Fathers never intended to endow any group of people with the right to enslave another group of people. But in a surprising turn, he said that if the succession was renamed to be called a revolution, then it would be acceptable because then, it would fail to call for the enforcement of a constituional right, and it also seperated the government from the requirement of giving the succession recognition. So in effect, Buchannan hindered the succession by declaring the right to a secession to be null and void, but failed to denouce slavery because he also defended the excuses that the sourtherns were using to threaten the secession in the first place. The postition he took angered both the people of the North and South. In the end, the Battle of Fort Sumter commenced and the South excercised their right to sucession after all.</span>
Answer:
True
Explanation:
I recently studied this lol
Hope I helped. :)))
Protecting citizens against foreign and domestic terror and threats
