Lincoln's Blockade Proclamation

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,948
=====

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A PROCLAMATION:



Whereas an insurrection against the Government of the United States has broken out in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and the laws of the United States for the collection of the revenue cannot be effectually executed therein comformably to that provision of the Constitution which requires duties to be uniform throughout the United States:



And whereas a combination of persons engaged in such insurrection, have threatened to grant pretended letters of marque to authorize the bearers thereof to commit assaults on the lives, vessels, and property of good citizens of the country lawfully engaged in commerce on the high seas, and in waters of the United States: And whereas an Executive Proclamation has been already issued, requiring the persons engaged in these disorderly proceedings to desist therefrom, calling out a militia force for the purpose of repressing the same, and convening Congress in extraordinary session, to deliberate and determine thereon:



Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, with a view to the same purposes before mentioned, and to the protection of the public peace, and the lives and property of quiet and orderly citizens pursuing their lawful occupations, until Congress shall have assembled and deliberated on the said unlawful proceedings, or until the same shall ceased, have further deemed it advisable to set on foot a blockade of the ports within the States aforesaid, in pursuance of the laws of the United States, and of the law of Nations, in such case provided. For this purpose a competent force will be posted so as to prevent entrance and exit of vessels from the ports aforesaid. If, therefore, with a view to violate such blockade, a vessel shall approach, or shall attempt to leave either of the said ports, she will be duly warned by the Commander of one of the blockading vessels, who will endorse on her register the fact and date of such warning, and if the same vessel shall again attempt to enter or leave the blockaded port, she will be captured and sent to the nearest convenient port, for such proceedings against her and her cargo as prize, as may be deemed advisable.



And I hereby proclaim and declare that if any person, under the pretended authority of the said States, or under any other pretense, shall molest a vessel of the United States, or the persons or cargo on board of her, such person will be held amenable to the laws of the United States for the prevention and punishment of piracy.



In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.



Done at the City of Washington, this nineteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-fifth.



ABRAHAM LINCOLN
By the President:
WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State
=====


Battalion,


There you go.


Tim
 

wilber6150

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
19,254
Location
deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
From the Prize case...
7. The present civil war between the United States and the so-called Confederate States has such character and magnitude as to give the United States the same rights and powers which they might exercise in the case of a national or foreign war, and they have, therefore, the right jure bello to institute a blockade of any ports in possession of the rebellious States.
then later...

Whether the President, in fulfilling his duties as Commander-in-chief in suppressing an insurrection, has met with such armed hostile resistance and a civil war of such alarming proportions as will compel him to accord to them the character of belligerents is a question to be decided by him, and this Court must be governed by the decisions and acts of the political department of the Government to which this power was entrusted. "He must determine what degree of force the crisis demands." The proclamation of blockade is itself official and conclusive evidence to the Court that a state of war existed which demanded and authorized a recourse to such a measure under the circumstances peculiar to the case.
and finally...

On this first question, therefore, we are of the opinion that the President had a right, jure belli, to institute a blockade of ports in possession of the States in rebellion which neutrals are bound to regard.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

wilber6150

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
19,254
Location
deep in the Mohawk Valley of Central New York
Tim, you used the wrong proclamation that sets out Lincolns legal position, forgot to include the second tier of VA NC states that had secedded. Battn asked you a question of law, which you have been unable to answer and gave the wrong primary source material in reply.

This is where POTUS sets out his legal justification.
http://www.archives.gov/northeast/nyc/education/images/union-blockade.pdf
So once again the ruling by the Court means nothing to you.....Oh thats right because it was rigged...Don't feed the troll Don't feed the troll... Don;t feed the troll...I guess thats why you can't find any legal decesion saying Lincoln was wrong in blockading the ports or calling up the troops...
 

Lnwlf

2nd Lieutenant
Retired Moderator
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
2,464
Location
SOUTHERN Indiana
Wilber, what case are you looking at, and where can I find it?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Lnwlf

2nd Lieutenant
Retired Moderator
Honored Fallen Comrade
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
2,464
Location
SOUTHERN Indiana
Thanks Wilber! This will make it easier for me to follow the discussion and future discussions!
 

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,948
Tim, you used the wrong proclamation that sets out Lincolns legal position, forgot to include the second tier of VA NC states that had secedded. Battn asked you a question of law, which you have been unable to answer and gave the wrong primary source material in reply.

This is where POTUS sets out his legal justification.
http://www.archives.gov/northeast/nyc/education/images/union-blockade.pdf
There were three proclamations on the blockade. The 2nd one is little different than the 1st, and is issued only a few days later to extend the blockade to include Virginia and North Carolina because they had refused to comply with Lincoln's call for troops and had declared for secession. The 3rd was issued in August after the war started to settle in and appeared to be headed for the long-term (i.e., after Bull Run).

However, if you wanted to post them to the thread instead of complaining, you could have. Since you did not, I will.

Also, instead of clogging up the Militia thread with a topic not related to it, you should post anything relevant to the blockade over here.

Tim
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,948
By The President of the United States of America
A Proclamation
Whereas, for the reasons assigned in my proclamation of the 19th instant, a blockade of the ports of the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas was ordered to be established;

And whereas since that date public property of the United States has been seized, the collection of the revenue obstructed, and duly commissioned officers of the United States while engaged in executing the orders of their superiors have been arrested and held in custody as prisoners, or have been impeded in the discharge of their official duties without due legal process by persons claiming to act under authorities of the States of Virginia and North Carolina:

An efficient blockade of the ports of those States will also be established.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington this twenty-seventh day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-fifth.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
By the President:​
WILLIAM H. SEWARD,
Secretary of State​
=====


That is the 2nd Proclamation.
 

B Peach

First Sergeant
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
1,335
However, if you wanted to post them to the thread instead of complaining, you could have. Since you did not, I will.
I had already done so.

Also, instead of clogging up the Militia thread with a topic not related to it, you should post anything relevant to the blockade over here.
I decline. Unlike you i know what authority was used and why it belongs here:http://civilwartalk.com/forums/showthread.php?205667-Legality-of-Lincoln-s-call-up-of-troops Nor see the need for 2 threads a dozen posts and still no answer from you to Battns question.
 

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,948
The third Proclamation:
=====
By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

Whereas on the 15th day of April, 1861, the President of the United States, in view of an insurrection against the laws, Constitution, and Government of the United States which had broken out within the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and in pursuance of the provisions of the act entitled "An act to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions, and to repeal the act now in force for that purpose," approved February 28, 1795, did call forth the militia to suppress said insurrection and to cause the laws of the Union to be duly executed, and the insurgents have failed to disperse by the time directed by the President; and

Whereas such insurrection has since broken out, and yet exists, within the States of Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas; and

Whereas the insurgents in all the said States claim to act under the authority thereof, and such claim is not disclaimed or repudiated by the persons exercising the functions of government in such State or States or in the part or parts thereof in which such combinations exist, nor has such insurrection been suppressed by said States:

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, in pursuance of an act of Congress approved July 13, 1861, do hereby declare that the inhabitants of the said States of Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Florida (except the inhabitants of that part of the State of Virginia lying west of the Alleghany Mountains and of such other parts of that State and the other States hereinbefore named as may maintain a loyal adhesion to the Union and the Constitution or may be from time to time occupied and controlled by forces of the United States engaged in the dispersion of said insurgents) are in a state of insurrection against the United States, and that all commercial intercourse between the same and the inhabitants thereof, with the exceptions aforesaid, and the citizens of other States and other parts of the United States is unlawful, and will remain unlawful until such insurrection shall cease or has been suppressed; that all goods and chattels, wares and merchandise, coming from any of said States, with the exceptions aforesaid, into other parts of the United States without the special license and permission of the President, through the Secretary of the Treasury, or proceeding to any of said States, with the exceptions aforesaid, by land or water, together with the vessel or vehicle conveying the same or conveying persons to or from said States, with said exceptions, will be forfeited to the United States; and that from and after fifteen days from the issuing of this proclamation all ships and vessels belonging in whole or in part to any citizen or inhabitant of any of said States, with said exceptions, found at sea or in any port of the United States will be forfeited to the United States; and I hereby enjoin upon all district attorneys, marshals, and officers of the revenue and of the military and naval forces of the United States to be vigilant in the execution of said act and in the enforcement of the penalties and forfeitures imposed or declared by it, leaving any party who may think himself aggrieved thereby to his application to the Secretary of the Treasury for the remission of any penalty or forfeiture, which the said Secretary is authorized by law to grant if in his judgment the special circumstances of any case shall require such remission.

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.
Done at the city of Washington, this 16th day of August, A.D. 1861, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-sixth.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
By the President:

WILLIAM H. SEWARD,
Secretary of State.



 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,948
I decline. Unlike you i know what authority was used and why it belongs here:http://civilwartalk.com/forums/showthread.php?205667-Legality-of-Lincoln-s-call-up-of-troops Nor see the need for 2 threads a dozen posts and still no answer from you to Battns question.
Clearly you do not. Lincoln never claimed the Militia Act gave him to establish a blockade because it does not: it only gives him authority to call for the Militia and use it. None of the three Proclamations uses the Militia Act as an authorization for a blockade; you only imagine that it does.

But don't let what was actually done get in your way. You just go ahead.

Tim
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,267
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Clearly you do not. Lincoln never claimed the Militia Act gave him to establish a blockade because it does not: it only gives him authority to call for the Militia and use it. None of the three Proclamations uses the Militia Act as an authorization for a blockade; you only imagine that it does.

But don't let what was actually done get in your way. You just go ahead.

Tim
Tim,

And he will. :smile:

Sincerely,
Unionblue
 

Savez

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
2,422
Location
Alabama
Legal or not, it was all about the money. Gotta collect that revenue !!
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Savez

Sergeant Major
Joined
Mar 13, 2009
Messages
2,422
Location
Alabama
Savez,

Sorry, but here we part company. :smile:

Unionblue
I understand but that's what Lincoln said in the proclomation.


Whereas an insurrection against the Government of the United States has broken out in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and the laws of the United States for the collection of the revenue cannot be effectually executed therein comformably to that provision of the Constitution which requires duties to be uniform throughout the United States:
Revenue and duties = $$$ The blockade was not simply a military move. It was a political and economical one.
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,267
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Savez,

But was it a wrong move because it included all of those issues? Does it automatically equate somehow that the primary motive behind Southern secession was "the collection of the revenue?" With all the declarations expressing the concern over slavery for the primary reason for leaving the Union?

The only way I see $$$ is because $$$ = slavery. The revenue and duties simply do not rise to the level of $$$ as slavery does, hence the reason it is mentioned almost everywhere by the seceding states, while the mention of tariff troubles is barely mentioned (as in Georgia's declaration which states that it was solved) to South Carolina debating adding the tariff as a reason, but is then dismissed because none want to detract from slavery as the cause.

Doesn't equate for me.

Sincerely,
Unionblue
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

M E Wolf

Colonel
Retired Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2008
Messages
17,457
Location
Virginia
Savez,

I agree with you in part.

Reference:
O.R.-- SERIES I--VOLUME 2 [S# 2] -- CHAPTER IX.
CORRESPONDENCE, ORDERS, AND RETURNS RELATING TO OPERATIONS IN MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA, VIRGINIA, AND WEST VIRGINIA FROM APRIL 16 TO JULY 31, 1861.
UNION CORRESPONDENCE. ETC.--#2
HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF VIRGINIA,
Fort Monroe, May 24, 1861.
Lieutenant-General WINFIELD SCOTT:
I have the honor to report my arrival at this post Wednesday morning at 8 o'clock. I found that no troops had arrived except some recruits for the Third and Fourth Massachusetts Regiments of three-months' men and two detached companies of three-years' men which have been temporarily annexed to those regiments.
[excerpt]
On Thursday night, three negroes, field hands, belonging to Col. Charles Mallory, now in command of the secession forces in this district, delivered themselves up to my picket guard, and, as I learned from the report of the officer of the guard in the morning, had been detained by him. I immediately gave personal attention to the matter, and found satisfactory evidence that these men were about to be taken to Carolina for the purpose of aiding the secession forces there; that two of them left wives and children (one a free woman) here; that the other had left his master from fear that he would be called upon to take part in the rebel armies. Satisfied of these facts from cautious examination of each of the negroes apart from the others, I determined for the present, and until better advised, as these men were very serviceable, and I had great need of labor in my quartermaster's department, to avail myself of their services, and that I would send a receipt to Colonel Mallory that I had so taken them, as I would for any other property of a private citizen which the exigencies of the service seemed to require to be taken by me, and especially property that was designed, adapted, and about to be used against the United States.

As this is but an individual instance in a course of policy which may be required to be pursued with regard to this species of property, I have detailed to the Lieutenant-General this case, and ask his direction. I am credibly informed that the negroes in this neighborhood are now being employed in the erection of batteries and other works by the rebels, which it would be nearly or quite impossible to construct without their labor. Shall they be allowed the use of this property against the United States, and we not be allowed its use in aid of the United States?

Major Cary, upon my interview with him, which took place between this fort and Hampton, desired information upon several questions:

First: Whether I would permit the removal through the blockade of the families of all persons who desired to pass southward or northward. In reply to this, I informed him that I could not permit such removal, for the reasons, first, that presence of the families of belligerents in a country was always the best hostage for the good behavior of the citizens; and, secondly, that one object of our blockade being to prevent the passage of supplies of provisions into Virginia so long as she remained in a hostile attitude, the reduction of the number of consumers would in so far tend to neutralize that effect.

He also desired to know if the transit of persons and families northward from Virginia would be permitted. I answered him that with the exception of an interruption at Baltimore there was no interruption of the travel of peaceable persons north of the Potomac, and that all the internal lines of travel through Virginia were at present in the hands of his friends, and that it depended upon them whether that line of travel was interrupted, and that the authorities at Washington could better judge of this question than myself, as necessary travel could go by way of Washington; that the passage through our blockading squadron would require an amount of labor and surveillance to prevent abuse which I did not conceive I ought to be called upon to perform.

Major Cary demanded to know with regard to the negroes what course I intended to pursue. I answered him substantially as I have written above, when he desired to know if I did not feel myself bound by my constitutional obligations to deliver up fugitives under the fugitive-slave act. To this I replied that the fugitive-slave act did not affect a foreign country, which Virginia claimed to be, and that she must reckon it one of the infelicities of her position that in so far at least she was taken at her word;that in Maryland, a loyal State, fugitives from service had been returned, and that even now, although so much pressed by my necessities for the use of these men of Colonel Mallory's, yet if their master would come to the fort and take the oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States I would deliver the men up to him and endeavor to hire their services of him if he desired to part with them. To this Major Cary responded that Colonel Mallory was absent.

[excerpt]
Trusting that these dispositions and movements will meet the approval of the Lieutenant-General, and begging pardon for the detailed length of this dispatch, I have the honor to be, most respectfully, your obedient servant,
BENJ. F. BUTLER,
Major-General, Commanding.

[Indorsements.]
MAY 29, 1861 There is much to praise in this report, and nothing to condemn. It is highly interesting in several aspects, particularly in its relation to the slave question.
Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War.
WINFIELD SCOTT.

I agree with the Lieutenant-General in his entire approval of the within report.
SIMON CAMERON.
-----
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top