Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
Jefferson Davis - THE RISE & FALL OF THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT
Hanny's basic problem with the Constitution, is an inability (or simple refusal) to recognize the 70 some odd years of legislation and court proceedings that occurred between the writing of the document and 1860.
As such, the implication here is that the Constitution is a mere treaty between separate and sovereign nation-states - a treaty which state officials simply agree to "support," as opposed to being bound to obey such as a law, under penalty of such. Rather, this treaty is written as merely a bi-lateral agreement, with each side bound solely by its own conscience and good reputation - and as such, may be thus dispensed with entirely, if either side believes a breach of faith has been committed by the other.
As such, the implication here is that the Constitution is a mere treaty between separate and sovereign nation-states - a treaty which state officials simply agree to "support," as opposed to being bound to obey such as a law, under penalty of such. Rather, this treaty is written as merely a bi-lateral agreement, with each side bound solely by its own conscience and good reputation - and as such, may be thus dispensed with entirely, if either side believes a breach of faith has been committed by the other.
It was actually spelled correctly, so it had to be copied and pasted from somewhere.
Lousy logic in the Rockwell quote as well. Even assuming there were anything to it, any "treaty" agreed to by the US automatically becomes part of US law according to the Constitution. US law is always superior to state law and constitutions according to the US Constitution -- which all the states agreed to, and which each and every state elected and appointed official swore a personal oath to abide by.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
I do comprehend the meaning. Trice tagged you, you should be eating a small dose of crow. Instead you call him a liar. I hope the man continues to point out inaccuracies where he sees them.
Rhett-oric... quite apt and I think more than a little accurate.
Another poster unable to comprehend, i will not debate with a liar, its that simple, but you also cannot grasp that from the post expalining it very simply.
Trice is free to post whatever he wants, but i will not reply, there is no point, anyone who stoops so low as to lie is no one i care to spend my time on, and i have a standard to which i keep, you dont have to like it, you dont have to agree with it, but its my standard and i live by it.
You may believe i got tagged, otoh i believe Trice repeatidly shows he is willing to lie to do the tagging, and since he goes on about economy and ****s that up, goes on about polictics and **** sthat up, mil matters and ****s that up, thinks messages between OC and wife tell you all you need to know about prioritys, and shows he does not know how comms worked in that age therby, you think he tagged another, otoh, he simply shows how much he does not know, to be sure i get tagged, everyone does, but to have to lie to do it, kinda spoils the sport.
Fri Jan 31 1862, TT Jackson pre breakfast reads a telgram from the Sec of war, directing him to order Gen Lorings command to Winchester to counter a threat via Romeny. This ruined 3 months of planning by TTJ, and was to counter a threat that did not exist, and by passed the chain of command as it did not come via Jhonston but direct to TTJ. Over breakfast and early morning TTJ explins to wife and friends he will be resigning and the reasons for doing so.
TTG writes to Gov Letcher explaining, what has occured, and asks for a special favour, to be apointed back to VMI, and tegraphs Johnston a letter of resignation to be forwarded to the sec of war, Gov letcher writes back and implores TTJ not to resign, by the ev all of Winchester knew of TTJ resignation, from a small group of friends the news spread throught all of the town by word of mouth. By that time his telgram of resignation was read by Johnston who attempted to talk, (via means of letters on the 31 and 1 of Feb), TTJ out of resignation, and was unable, and held onto the resignation till then, then forwarded the resignation to the Sec of war on the eve of the 1st, with an acidic explanation that he could not countermand the Sec of wars order that had cuased this resignation. A copy of the resignation finds its way to Congressman A Boteler, a friend and political heavyweight on the 1st and he attacks the Sec of war with it, in his office at midday, who at this point in time had yet to recieve any resignation from TTJ via channels, and could only mutter, you had better take this letter to the President, who when faced with it refused to acept it. Botelor was joined by Gov letcher and Davis and the Sec of war got there clocks wiped by them, and the upshot was that no action would be taken untill an officail resignation reached them, which happened on the 2nd and by the 4th a veritable whos who had weighed in on TTG side and persuaded him to withdraw the resignation for the good of the state, Lorings command was folded into TTJ AoTS and Loring bumped a grade and sent into limbo, and sec of war Benjamin learnt a lot about military infighting that had nothing to do with the WBTS, and i hope you have learnt a little about how letters and telgrams were used by mil officers of both sides, to which i should add, that like Mac, all high ranking officers wrote to family and friends before, during and after,reporting to higher command as a matter of course, because those letters or telegrames and official reports, were prepared by the writer, and then dispatched via aides whos job it was to do so, who returned with a reciept of delivery for official corespondence.
TTJ resignation from the US was of the same vein, laura knew of its before anyone else, just as ms sherman knew more about where Sherman was going to be and doing than did his superiors.
Now if you have finished baiting me, perhaps you can simply let the matter go?. Since you have nothing to contribute to the thread other than to fan the flames, which you do oftimes.
__________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
McCulloch v. Maryland clearly stands for the proposition that the Supremacy Clause applies to state action, not just to judges.
"The only remaining question is, whether the act of the state of Maryland, for taxing the bank thus incorporated, be repugnant to the constitution of the United States? ... There is another clause in the constitution, which has the effect of a prohibition on the exercise of their authority, in numerous cases. The 6th article of the constitution of the United States declares, that the laws made in pursuance of it, 'shall be the supreme law of the land, anything in the constitution, or laws of [17 U.S. 316, 361] any state to the contrary notwithstanding.' By this declaration, the states are prohibited from passing any acts which shall be repugnant to a law of the United States. ...
Thank you for showing you dont know what your posting about.
__________________ "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.
Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Hanny; the point is you have called the man a liar... not shown it. If he offends you by pointing out your inaccuracy fel free to place him on your ignore list. You even have that ability w/ me. But when you start putting everyone who disagrees w/ you on your ignore list... it is quite evident you aren't interested in conversation.
__________________ Few take the trouble to understand or to view the American scene with perspective. And we Americans love to find ourselves guilty of something. However, it is never I who am guilty, but those other Americans, the past or present government or the other political party. Americans almost never find other countries guilty. It is always ourselves or our fancied influence in other countries. Louis L'amour
Actually all Federal laws were being obstructed or challenged which included the seizure of property, weapons, specie, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanny
Except that requires a court to tell that this is the case, and no court did so, so not even close.
Well, no, Hanny. That doesn't require a court. If a government tries to enforce a law and you prevent it, you are obstructing the law. If you seize property without due process (say the state of Louisiana seizing the federal arms in Baton Rouge, or the $500,000 in funds at the Customs house, or the Customs House itself, or the US Mint in New Orleans, or the $500,000 in specie at the US Mint, etc. as they did), then you are violating the law and the government is allowed to use its enforcement powers to stop you.
It is generally AFTER such things happen that courts get involved. The policeman is not required to wait for a court decision to stop a riot or a robbery in progress. In fact, he would be regarded as delinquent in his duty if he did not attempt to stop such things.
Isn't that correct? Aren't you willing to admit it? Or do you live in some society that would require the policeman to await the action of a court before interfering with an on-going robbery or murder? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
The point is you could not answer the question, not who first posed it.
Hanny, both your link and the link cw1865 provided point to exactly the same article:
Were the States Sovereign Nations?by Brian McCandliss
What then is your objection?
Tim
__________________ "Let us, then, consider all attempts to weaken this Union, by maintaining that each state is separately and individually independent, as a species of political heresy, which can never benefit us, but may bring on us the most serious distresses."
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney of South Carolina, 1740-1824, Revolutionary War soldier, one of the authors of the US Constitution in 1787, speaking at the South Carolina Ratifying Convention in 1788.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Jefferson Davis - THE RISE & FALL OF THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT 
Linear Mode
