Civil War History - General DiscussionFor Discussions on Civil War Era Personalities, Politics, Issues, Campaigns, Battles, and more. Serious Civil War Discussions Only Please! All other posts will be deleted.
Nothing was unconstitutionally formed into West Virginia.
Unlike the non-existent constitutional prohibition you construct on the question of whether a State could secede from the union, the constitutional prohibition against WV's formation is so clear that (to borrow a nice phrase from the London Times) it could "be denied by no one but a nisi prius lawyer."
"...but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."
Quote:
Counties don't vote, people vote. And the vote from West Virginia was against secession by a factor of about 3-1. The population in West Virginia was definitely overwhelmingly Unionist.
It wasn't anywhere close to 3-1. In fact, it was less than 2-1.
But you are right about one thing. When it comes to a state's federal representation, counties don't vote. However, since the majority of the people who did indeed vote in at least 18 of the 45 counties illegally wrested from the State of Virginia were pro-secession, it appears there wasn't much concern among the pretenders for the actual will of the counties they unconstitutionally carved away. Had they only carved away those parts of Virginia that were pro-Union, WV would be much, much smaller today. And one thing is crystal clear -- had they any concern for the Constitution, WV wouldn't exist at all.
What of the importance of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroads to the Union army and to Northern capitalists? Mason County alone accounted for one third of the state's coal output and many Northern industrialists were attracted to the growing oil and natural gas industry, along with the blossoming ironwork industry.
Without control of the railways, there was no route for industrial and mining products to be transported to market, and this was imperative for the Capitalists in the area. It's these men Cash who stood to lose the most from a separation from the Union, and whom I believe were the driving force behind the movement to separate western Virginia.
Back then, controlling coal was like controlling oil is today. And those resources were not only needed to fight the war but to use for the building of the TC railroad.
Have you not said that the duly elected government of Virginia had no right to govern the state, but that a small group "recognized" by people outside of the state did? That sounds exactly like a dictatorship to me.
-------------
Then you don't know what a dictatorship is.
According to the Constitution, the Richmond Government was unqualified to hold office. The Restored Government was chosen by the loyal people in an election to represent the state, and were recognized as the legitimate government of the state according to constitutional principles. There was no dictatorship involved.
"...but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress."
------------
And they had the consent of both Congress and the recognized legitimate legislature of the state of Virginia.
It wasn't anywhere close to 3-1. In fact, it was less than 2-1.
----------------
30,586 against secession to 10,021 in favor of secession. That looks far closer to 3-1 to me than it does to 2-1.
What of the importance of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroads to the Union army and to Northern capitalists?
--------------
The B&O ran through West Virginia. It wasn't West Virginia.
Mason County alone accounted for one third of the state's coal output and many Northern industrialists were attracted to the growing oil and natural gas industry, along with the blossoming ironwork industry.
--------------
And what about Boone County, Kanawha County, Clay County, Braxton County, Gilmer County, Lewis County, Upshur County, Randolph County, Tucker County, Preston County, Barbour County, Taylor County, Harrison County, and all the other counties of West Virginia that were farming communities?
Without control of the railways, there was no route for industrial and mining products to be transported to market, and this was imperative for the Capitalists in the area. It's these men Cash who stood to lose the most from a separation from the Union, and whom I believe were the driving force behind the movement to separate western Virginia.
---------------
The driving forces behind any such movement would be the ones who had the most political power, because they are able to mobilize the most people. Can you show how Waitman Willey, John Carlile, Arthur Boreman, Francis Pierpont, James C. McGrew, Judge Jackson, C. J. Stewart, Porter, Tarr, Hubbard, Patrick, or E. B. Hall were "capitalists?"
According to the Constitution, the Richmond Government was unqualified to hold office. The Restored Government was chosen by the loyal people in an election to represent the state, and were recognized as the legitimate government of the state according to constitutional principles. There was no dictatorship involved.
Regards,
Cash
The Richmond Government was "unqualified" in whose eyes? The people they represented and governed, or in yours?
According to the Constitution. Article VI, Clause 3, as I quoted earlier.
Regards,
Cash
Cash, this seems to me to be such a feeble stance.
The only plausible logic in using this clause as support for your view is that you define "the Constitution" as "the standing US government." Of course, such is quite a distortion. If you have in reality adopted such a definition, it is no wonder you are having such a difficult time with the unquestionable prohibition laid out in Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1.
As RE Lee so succintly put it,
"The South has contended only for the supremacy of the constitution, and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance to it." (letter to Lord Acton, Dec. 15, 1866)
[quote=hawglips]Cash, this seems to me to be such a feeble stance.
The only plausible logic in using this clause as support for your view is that you define "the Constitution" as "the standing US government."
---------------------
No, I define the Constitution as the fundamental law of the land. As the Richmond government was in rebellion, they had declared the Constitution of the United States no longer applied to them. As such, they were no longer loyal to it. Rather, they pledged their loyalty to the confederate constitution.
Therefore, by Article VI, Clause 3 they were constitutionally unqualified to hold office.
As RE Lee so succintly put it,
"The South has contended only for the supremacy of the constitution, and the just administration of the laws made in pursuance to it." (letter to Lord Acton, Dec. 15, 1866)
-------------------
General Lee was being less than honest. If they were contending only for the supremacy of the Constitution, they would not have declared it no longer applied to them.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
