Lincoln Lincoln's Subversion Of The Constitution.

"I felt that measures otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the Constitution through the preservation of the Nation. Right or wrong, I assumed this ground and now avow it."


So your own evidence shows you're wrong.

Regards,
Cash
 
"You will take possession by military force, of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce . . . and prohibit any further publication thereof . . . You are therefore commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison . . . The editors, proprietors and publishers of the aforementioned newspapers." (Order of Abraham Lincoln to General John Dix, May 18, 1864)

Not a violation of the Constitution at all.

The New York World was suppressed because it published a bogus proclamation it claimed was made by President Lincoln which talked about recent reverses, asked for a national day of public humiliation and prayer, and called for 400,000 new troops. Natty might condone a newspaper's lying and publishing a false proclamation, but this was an act deliberately designed to hurt the Union war effort, and thus was a part of levying war against the United States. The editor in question was lucky he was not brought up on treason charges, but instead the administration took the more measured approach of suppressing the paper for three days.

As Randall tells us, "In seeking a just interpretation of the question of press control during the Civil War, one must balance the immediate and practical considerations, of which the executive branch must be ever watchful, with the constitutional and legal phases of the subject. When powerful papers were upsetting strategy by the revelation of military secrets, discrediting the Government, defaming the generals, weakening the morale of soldier and citizen, uttering disloyal sentiments, fomenting jealous antagonism among officers, and clamoring for a peace which would have meant the consummation of disunion, even the most patient administration charged with the preservation of the Union by war, would have been tempted to the use of vigorous measures of suppression." [James G. Randall, _Constitutional Problems Under Lincoln,_ p. 505]

Randall says, "A striking fact concerning the subject of journalistic activity during the Civil War was the lack of any real censorship." [p. 481]

Once again, your claims are bankrupt.

Regards,
Cash
 
"In 1861, 166 of the 509 cases of known residence involved Marylanders, that is, 32.6 perent. In 1863-1864, the number of arrests in Maryland constituted but 136 of 1,001 cases where place of arrest is known, or only 13.6 percent." [Mark E. Neely, Jr., _The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Rights,_ p. 75]


Again, I highly suggest reading books by real historians rather than charlatans like DiLiarenzo and Adams.

Regards,
Cash

Mr Cash Sir, here is some reading from the very same Mark E. Neely, Jr that you quote...

As most students of the Lincoln administration's racial policies agree, a historian must pay careful attention not only to what Lincoln said but also to what he actually did. The administration's statistical record on arbitrary arrests is persuasive testimony that Lincoln was not particularly embarrassed by the policy. No careful work on the numbers of civilians arrested by military authorities or for reasons of state has ever been done by a historian, and those historians who have attempted an estimate previously have been writing with the goal of defending Lincoln in mind. Even so, the lowest estimate is 13,535 arrests from February 15, 1862, to the end of the war.3 At least 866 others occurred from the beginning of the war until February 15, 1862. Therefore, at least 14,401 civilians were arrested by the Lincoln administration. If one takes the population of the North during the Civil War as 22.5 million (using the 1860 census and counting West Virginia but not Nevada), then one person out of every 1,563 in the North was arrested during the Civil War.4
 
Dear Natty;

On your post #98; you fail to cite which specific order and any solid source from the Official Records to prove your claim.

Since you are the alleged expert--failure to truthfully disclose your sources, where you've gained it from; I find it with purpose to withhold the facts from the discussion, fully--is more distraction rather than helpful discussion.

Just a few carefully selected cut and pasted excerpts without the sources, leads me to believe that this post is merely to disrupt and corrupt the truth.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf
 
Mr Cash Sir, here is some reading from the very same Mark E. Neely, Jr that you quote...

As most students of the Lincoln administration's racial policies agree, a historian must pay careful attention not only to what Lincoln said but also to what he actually did. The administration's statistical record on arbitrary arrests is persuasive testimony that Lincoln was not particularly embarrassed by the policy. No careful work on the numbers of civilians arrested by military authorities or for reasons of state has ever been done by a historian, and those historians who have attempted an estimate previously have been writing with the goal of defending Lincoln in mind. Even so, the lowest estimate is 13,535 arrests from February 15, 1862, to the end of the war.3 At least 866 others occurred from the beginning of the war until February 15, 1862. Therefore, at least 14,401 civilians were arrested by the Lincoln administration. If one takes the population of the North during the Civil War as 22.5 million (using the 1860 census and counting West Virginia but not Nevada), then one person out of every 1,563 in the North was arrested during the Civil War.4

"Many of the 864 arrested [under Seward] were residents of the Confederacy--almost a third." [Mark E. Neely, Jr., _The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Rights,_ p. 26]

And let's see what he says in the article you provided:

"Another substantial percentage of persons arrested were not Northerners at all. Seventy-nine of the 582, or 13.6 percent were Virginia residents, and another 12.7 percent were residents of other seceded states. Thus a whopping 26.3 percent of the people arrested were citizens of Confederate states, either persons arrested for causing trouble in the few areas of the South controlled by Union armies in the first year of the war or Southerners trapped in the North when the war began and arrested for trying to get back home to join the Confederacy."

And

"Another 8.6 percent of the arrests were unthreatening politically because they touched another group of non-voters, foreigners. Most of these were British subjects (5.3 percent of all persons arrested), usually released after a short period of time — not because they were not guilty of serious offenses against the United States but because the British government looked after its subjects, had consuls visit the prisons regularly in search of Englishmen, and put pressure on Seward to let them go. No one felt more keenly than Seward did the necessity of keeping Great Britain out of the war — hence the lucky fate of many a British supporter of the Confederacy."

And

"Among the 866 arrests known to have occurred under Seward, 612 have some notation of cause of the arrest. Many of them have nothing to do with political dissent — or any other activity which normally takes place on dry land. One hundred and fourteen (or 18.6 percent) were picked up in boats or immediately upon disembarking from a vessel.
"Most of the persons arrested on the high seas were blockade runners: owners, captains, crews, or passengers caught going through the blockade to a Confederate port. Here again the great error in many previous conceptions of the debate over arbitrary arrests becomes apparent. They were not aimed at shaping public opinion necessarily. In some respects even, they had no "aim," though Lincoln himself tended to think of them as being "made, not so much for what has been done, as for what probably would be done." In fact, arrests were most often made for what had been done, though on skimpy evidence, and were frequently not so much "aimed" at alleviating particular problems as available as a catch-all solution for problems no one dreamed would arise and for which there seemed to be no other solution."

And

"It should be remembered too that many of the arrests involved allegations, not of victimless crimes like holding the wrong political ideas, but of serious ones like murdering pickets, bushwhacking, burning bridges, and raising money and men for the Confederate Army. This was especially the case in Missouri, Virginia, and Kentucky (always) and Maryland (at times of invasions of the North). The likelihood, of course, is that the percentage of serious crimes rose after 1862 as the Union conquered more and more Southern territory, just as it is likely that the percentage of the civilians arrested who were Confederate citizens and not possible voters for or against Lincoln rose.
"In other words, the population of persons arrested got guiltier and guiltier (of being genuinely disloyal) as the war progressed. Even under Seward, a substantial portion of those arrested were guilty and were later indicted and convicted or confessed or (admittedly, the largest category here) asked to be exchanged and/or were exchanged. The Lincoln administration took the view that anyone willing to be exchanged for a Northerner in Confederate hands was guilty. This sort of follow-up information on the arrests is extremely difficult to come by, but a minimum of 2.9 percent (18) of the persons arrested were guilty by the above criteria. Add to these the blockade runners and honorable sailors (minus the English sailors who were duped into blockade running under the ruse of engaging for the West Indies trade and other confused foreigners), and it could well be argued that at least 19 percent (117) of the 612 arrests netted guilty persons."


Regards,
Cash
 
Dear Natty;

On your post #98; you fail to cite which specific order and any solid source from the Official Records to prove your claim.

Since you are the alleged expert--failure to truthfully disclose your sources, where you've gained it from; I find it with purpose to withhold the facts from the discussion, fully--is more distraction rather than helpful discussion.

Just a few carefully selected cut and pasted excerpts without the sources, leads me to believe that this post is merely to disrupt and corrupt the truth.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf

http://www.mrlincolnandnewyork.org/inside.asp?ID=74&subjectID=3

The Lincoln Institute...

President Lincoln ordered General Dix

Whereas, there has been wickedly and traitorously printed and published this morning, in the "New York World" and New York 'Journal of Commerce' newspapers printed and published in the city of New York,—a false and spurious proclamation, purporting to be signed by the President, and to be countersigned by the Secretary of State, which publication is of a treasonable nature, designed to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, and to the rebels now at war against the Government, and their aiders and abettors: you are therefore hereby commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command, the editors, proprietors and published of the aforesaid newspapers, and all such persons as, after public notice has been given of the falsehood of said publication, print and publish the same, with intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy;—and you will hold the persons so arrested, in close custody, until they can be brought to trial before a military commission, for their offense. You will also take possession by military force, of the printing establishments of the 'New York World' and 'Journal of Commerce,' and hold the same until further order, and prevent any further publication therefrom.17​
 
O.R.-- SERIES I--VOLUME XXIII/2 [S# 35]
Correspondence, Orders, And Returns Relating To Operations In Kentucky, Middle And East Tennessee, North Alabama, And Southwest Virginia, From January 21 To August 10, 1863.
UNION CORRESPONDENCE. ETC.--#16
CHICAGO, June 3, 1863.
(Received 10.38 p.m.)
Hon. ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President:
At a meeting held to-day in reference to the suppression of the Chicago Times, by order of General Burnside, the following was adopted:
Whereas, in the opinion of this meeting of citizens, of all parties, the peace of this city and State, if not the general, welfare of the country, are likely to be promoted by the suspension or rescinding of the recent order of General Burnside for the suppression of the Chicago Times: Therefore, Resolved, That upon the ground of expediency alone, such of our citizens as concur in this opinion, without regard to party, are hereby recommended to unite in a petition to the President, respectfully asking the suspension or rescinding said order.
The undersigned, in pursuance of the above resolution, respectfully petition the President's favorable consideration and action in accordance therewith.
F. C. SHERMAN,
ayor of Chicago.
VAN H. HIGGINS. WIRT DEXTER.
WILLIAM B. OGDEN. A.C. COVENTRY.
E. VAN BUREN. W.A. HOHN.
SAMUEL W. FULLER. C. BECKWITH.
S. S. HAYES. HENRY G. MILLER.
A. WARRINGTON. M.F. FEELEY.
THEODORE HAYNE.
We respectfully ask for the above the serious and prompt consideration of the President.
LYMAN TRUMBULL
ISAAC N. ARNOLD
GENERAL ORDERS, No. 91.
HDQRS. DEPARTMENT OF THE OHIO,
Cincinnati, Ohio, June 4, 1863.
I. By direction of the President of the United States, the order suppressing the publication of the Chicago Times is hereby revoked.
II. The circulation of the New York World in this department having been suppressed for the same reasons that caused the suppression of the publication of the Chicago Times, that portion of the general order relating to said newspaper is hereby revoked. It will be allowed to resume its circulation.
By command of Major-General Burnside:
N.H. McLEAN,
Assistant Adjutant-General.
----------------------------------------------------------
Clearly, the press was surpressed by order of General Burnside and the President--Abraham Lincoln caused Burnside's order to be revoke and the Press to resume its practice.

Another set of BS about Lincoln proven a lie, IMHO.

Respectfully submitted,
M. E. Wolf
 
This was what Neely wrote 8 years before he published his book. It looks as though he's changed his mind on quite a few things as he found out more information:

"Many of the 864 arrested [under Seward] were residents of the Confederacy--almost a third." [Mark E. Neely, Jr., _The Fate of Liberty: Abraham Lincoln and Civil Rights,_ p. 26] So when Neely did more research he found his initial thoughts on this were incorrect, that a huge number of people arrested were actually from the confederacy.

Regards,
Cash

Mr Cash Sir, The same Mr Neely that you quoted aslo wrote this...

The most notable feature of the arrests is their geographic distribution. Of the 866 persons on the list, place of residence is noted for 582. One hundred and seventy-one were Marylanders. Thus a state with a little over 3 percent of the North's population produced 29.4 percent of the persons arrested by the Lincoln administration in the first year of the war.
 
Mr Cash Sir, The same Mr Neely that you quoted aslo wrote this...

The most notable feature of the arrests is their geographic distribution. Of the 866 persons on the list, place of residence is noted for 582. One hundred and seventy-one were Marylanders. Thus a state with a little over 3 percent of the North's population produced 29.4 percent of the persons arrested by the Lincoln administration in the first year of the war.

And let's see what he says in the article you provided:

"Another substantial percentage of persons arrested were not Northerners at all. Seventy-nine of the 582, or 13.6 percent were Virginia residents, and another 12.7 percent were residents of other seceded states. Thus a whopping 26.3 percent of the people arrested were citizens of Confederate states, either persons arrested for causing trouble in the few areas of the South controlled by Union armies in the first year of the war or Southerners trapped in the North when the war began and arrested for trying to get back home to join the Confederacy."

And

"Another 8.6 percent of the arrests were unthreatening politically because they touched another group of non-voters, foreigners. Most of these were British subjects (5.3 percent of all persons arrested), usually released after a short period of time — not because they were not guilty of serious offenses against the United States but because the British government looked after its subjects, had consuls visit the prisons regularly in search of Englishmen, and put pressure on Seward to let them go. No one felt more keenly than Seward did the necessity of keeping Great Britain out of the war — hence the lucky fate of many a British supporter of the Confederacy."

And

"Among the 866 arrests known to have occurred under Seward, 612 have some notation of cause of the arrest. Many of them have nothing to do with political dissent — or any other activity which normally takes place on dry land. One hundred and fourteen (or 18.6 percent) were picked up in boats or immediately upon disembarking from a vessel.
"Most of the persons arrested on the high seas were blockade runners: owners, captains, crews, or passengers caught going through the blockade to a Confederate port. Here again the great error in many previous conceptions of the debate over arbitrary arrests becomes apparent. They were not aimed at shaping public opinion necessarily. In some respects even, they had no "aim," though Lincoln himself tended to think of them as being "made, not so much for what has been done, as for what probably would be done." In fact, arrests were most often made for what had been done, though on skimpy evidence, and were frequently not so much "aimed" at alleviating particular problems as available as a catch-all solution for problems no one dreamed would arise and for which there seemed to be no other solution."

And

"It should be remembered too that many of the arrests involved allegations, not of victimless crimes like holding the wrong political ideas, but of serious ones like murdering pickets, bushwhacking, burning bridges, and raising money and men for the Confederate Army. This was especially the case in Missouri, Virginia, and Kentucky (always) and Maryland (at times of invasions of the North). The likelihood, of course, is that the percentage of serious crimes rose after 1862 as the Union conquered more and more Southern territory, just as it is likely that the percentage of the civilians arrested who were Confederate citizens and not possible voters for or against Lincoln rose.
"In other words, the population of persons arrested got guiltier and guiltier (of being genuinely disloyal) as the war progressed. Even under Seward, a substantial portion of those arrested were guilty and were later indicted and convicted or confessed or (admittedly, the largest category here) asked to be exchanged and/or were exchanged. The Lincoln administration took the view that anyone willing to be exchanged for a Northerner in Confederate hands was guilty. This sort of follow-up information on the arrests is extremely difficult to come by, but a minimum of 2.9 percent (18) of the persons arrested were guilty by the above criteria. Add to these the blockade runners and honorable sailors (minus the English sailors who were duped into blockade running under the ruse of engaging for the West Indies trade and other confused foreigners), and it could well be argued that at least 19 percent (117) of the 612 arrests netted guilty persons."

Once again your own source proves you wrong.

Regards,
Cash
 
O.R.--SERIES III--VOLUME IV [S# 125]
CORRESPONDENCE, ORDERS, REPORTS, AND RETURNS OF THE UNION AUTHORITIES FROM JANUARY 1, 1864, TO APRIL 30, 1865.(*)--#16
NEW YORK, May 18, 1864.
(Received 10 a.m.)
Maj. THOMAS T. ECKERT:
The following is taken from the New York World of this morning. Is it genuine?
M. S. ROBERTS,
Manager New York Office.
Four hundred thousand more troops called for.
EXECUTIVE MANSION,
May 17, 1864.
FELLOW-CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES:
In all exigencies it becomes a nation carefully to scrutinize its line of conduct, humbly to approach the Throne of Grace, and meekly to implore forgiveness, wisdom, and guidance.
For reasons known only to Him it has been decreed that this country should be the scene of unparalleled outrage, and this nation the monumental sufferer of the nineteenth century. With a heavy heart, but an undiminished confidence in our cause, I approach the performance of duty, rendered imperative by my sense of weakness before the Almighty, and of justice to the people.
It is not necessary that I should tell you that the first Virginia campaign under Lieutenant-General Grant, in whom I have every confidence, and whose courage and fidelity the people do well to honor, is virtually closed.
He has conducted his great enterprise with discreet ability.
He has inflicted great loss upon the enemy. He has crippled their strength and defeated their plans.
In view, however, of the situation in Virginia, the disaster at Red River, the delay at Charleston, and the general state of the country, I, Abraham Lincoln, do hereby recommend that Thursday, the twenty-sixth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-four, be solemnly set apart throughout these United States as a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer. Deeming, furthermore, that the present condition of public affairs presents an extraordinary occasion, and in view of the pending expiration of the service of 100,000 of our troops, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, by virtue of the power vested in me by the Constitution and the laws, have thought fit to call forth, and hereby do call forth, the citizens of the United States between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years to the aggregate number of 400,000, in order to suppress the existing rebellious combinations and to cause the due execution of the laws. And furthermore, in case any State or number of States shall fail to furnish by the fifteenth day of June next their assigned quotas, it is hereby ordered that the same be raised by an immediate and peremptory draft. The details for this object will be communicated the State authorities through the War Department. I appeal to all loyal citizens to favor, facilitate, and aid this effort to maintain the honor, the integrity, and the existence of our national Union, and the perpetuity of popular government. 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 seventeenth day of May, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-four, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-eighth.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN.
By the President:
WILLIAM H. SEWARD,
Secretary of State.
-----
NEW YORK, May 18, 1864.
(Received 11.35 a.m.)
Hon. W. H. SEWARD,
Secretary of State:
A proclamation by the President, countersigned by you, and believed to be spurious, has appeared in some of our morning papers calling for 400,000 men, and appointing the 26th instant as a day of fasting, humiliation, and prayer. Please answer immediately for steamer.
JOHN A. DIX,
Major-General.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
May 18, 1864.
To THE PUBLIC:
A paper purporting to be a proclamation of the President, counter-signed by the Secretary of State, and bearing date the 17th day of May, is reported to this Department as having appeared in the New York World of this date. The paper is an absolute forgery. No proclamation of that kind or any other has been made or proposed to be made by the President, or issued or proposed to be issued by the State Department or any Department of the Government.
WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
(Sent to New York press and to Charles Francis Adams, London, and William L. Dayton, Paris.)
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington City, May 18, 1864.
Major-General DIX,
New York:
I have just seen a copy of the spurious proclamation referred to in your telegram. It is a base and treasonable forgery.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
-----
continued
 
EXECUTIVE MANSION,
Washington, May 18, 1864.
Maj. Gen. JOHN A. DIX,
Commanding, New York:
Whereas, there has been wickedly and traitorously printed and published this morning in the New York World and New York Journal of Commerce, newspapers printed and published in the city of New York, a false and spurious proclamation purporting to be signed by the President and to be countersigned by the Secretary of State, which publication is of a treasonable nature, designed to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and to the rebels now at war against the Government, and their aiders and abettors, you are, therefore, hereby commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers, and all such persons as, after public notice has been given of the falsehood of said publication, print and publish the same, with intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy, and you will hold the persons so arrested in close custody until they can be brought to trial before a military commission for their offense. You will also take possession, by military force, of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce and hold the same until further orders, and prevent any further publication therefrom.
A. LINCOLN.
-----
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington, D.C., May 18, 1864--2 p.m.
Maj. Gen. JOHN. A. DIX,
New York:
The President directs that immediately upon receipt of this order you take military possession of the offices of the Independent Telegraph Company at New York (one corner Cedar and Nassau streets, Gold Room, William street, and Brokers' Exchange), and of all the instruments, dispatches, and papers that may be found in the office or upon the person of the manager, superintendent, and operators, and keep possession thereof, and arrest the manager, operators, superintendent, and hold them in close custody until further order, and permit no telegraph to be sent over the line until further orders. Strict diligence, attention, and confidence is desired in the execution of this order, and you are requested to give it your personal attention and employ your best officers.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
(Similar orders to General Cadwalader, Philadelphia; Colonel Born-ford, Harrisburg, and Captain Foster, Pittsburg.)
-----
NEW YORK, May 18, 1864.
(Received 4.35 p.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War :
I am investigating the gross fraud of this morning. The paper purporting to be a proclamation of the President was handed into the offices of the city newspapers at 4 o'clock, written on thin manifold paper of foolscap size, like the dispatches of the Associated Press. In handwriting and every other respect it was admirably calculated to deceive. It was published in the World and Journal of Commerce. None of the responsible editors of either of the papers was present. As soon as the editors of the World discovered the fraud they announced it on their bulletin, and they have offered a reward of $500 for the detection of the author. It was printed by the Herald, but none of the copies were issued, the fraud having been discovered before they left the office. I have sent to all the newspapers for their manuscripts and have received three. They are alike in respect to paper and handwriting. I think the authors will be detected, and I need not add that I shall in that case arrest and imprison them for trifling in so infamous a manner with the authority of the Government and the feelings of the community at this important juncture in our public affairs. Since writing the above the President's order for the arrest of the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the World and Journal of Commerce has come to hand. I shall execute it unless the foregoing information shall be deemed sufficient by the President to suspend it until my investigation is concluded.
JOHN A. DIX,
Major-General.
-----
WAR DEPARTMENT,
May 18, 1864.
Major-General DIX,
New York:
The President's telegram was an order to you which I think it was your duty to execute immediately upon its receipt. I have no further orders to give you.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
-----
NEW YORK, May 18, 1864.
(Received 5.40 p.m.)
Hon. EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
There will be no delay in the execution of either order. The telegraph offices will be seized immediately, and the newspapers, editors, &c., unless I hear from you before the guards are ready.
JOHN A. DIX,
Major-General.
------------------------
WAR DEPARTMENT,
May 18, 1864--6.30 p.m.
Major-General DIX,
New York:
Your telegram of 5.40 is just received. A great national crime has been committed by the publication. The editors, proprietors, and publishers, responsible and irresponsible, are in law guilty of that crime. You were not directed to make any investigation, but to execute the President's order; the investigation was to be made by a military commission. How you can excuse or justify delay in executing the President's order until you make an investigation is not for me to determine.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
-----
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington City, May 18, 1864--8.30 p.m.
Major-General DIX,
New York:
The officer in charge of the investigation, respecting the forged proclamation, reports that he is led to believe it originated in this city, and that the New York publishers were not privy to it. If your conclusions are the same you may suspend action against them until developments are made.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
-----
continued
 
NEW YORK, May 18, 1864.
(Received 10.40 p.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
The investigation was made by me as commanding officer of the department before the President's order was received, as my dispatch showed. There has been none since. I understood the President's orders as commands to be executed, and there has been no unnecessary delay in the execution. The telegraphic offices were seized as soon as my officers could reach them. The World and Journal of Commerce printing offices are in possession of my men. Two of my officers, Major Halpine and Captain Barstow, are engaged in the arrest of the editors, proprietors, and publishers, and a steamer is waiting at Castle Garden to take them to Fort Lafayette. The only delay has been in making proper arrangements to secure, as nearly as possible, simultaneous and effective action.
J. A. DIX,
Major-general.
----------------------------
-----
NEW YORK, May 18, 1864.
(Received 10.40 p.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
Your dispatch in regard to the probable origin of the forged proclamation is just received. I am satisfied the publishers of the World and Journal of Commerce had no knowledge of it. I shall, therefore, suspend the order as to them, but shall keep possession of their printing offices until you otherwise direct. The manager, superintendent, and operators of the telegraph line will be sent to Fort Lafayette in an hour. They have been in arrest since 5 o'clock.
JNO. A. DIX,
Major-General.
-----
PHILADELPHIA, May 18, 1864.
(Received 7.50 p.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
The telegram lines indicated in your telegram, and all the instruments, dispatches, and papers have been seized, and the manager, operators, and superintendents arrested and will be held until further orders. A large number of private dispatches are detained. Two other offices than those named by you connected with this line have also been taken possession of. They have through communication everywhere without going through the principal office. It is said that there are also other offices, which I will seize if I can find them. Please inform me if I am not acting correctly.
GEO. CADWALADER,
Major-General, Commanding.
-----
----
PITTSBURG, May 18, 1864.
Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
Under orders received at 5.30 I have seized papers, instruments, and J. H. Robinson, manager, J. R. Roe, assistant superintendent, George A. Hamilton, operator, W. J. Gill, clerk, Inland Telegraph Line, and all papers. Will send them at 8.35.
J. HERON FOSTER,
Capt. and Prov. Mar. Twenty-second District of Pennsylvania.
-----
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington City, May 18, 1864.
Major-General CADWALADER,
Philadelphia:
Accept the thanks of this Department for your prompt action. Secure and forward all the papers, and send the prisoners forward under guard to report to Colonel Wisewell, Military Governor.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
(Same to Capt. J. Heron Foster, Pittsburg.)
-----
HARRISBURG, May 18, 1864.
Hon. E. M. STANTON:
Have received your important telegram of this date. At 7 p.m. have taken possession of office of Independent Telegraph (self-styled Inland and American Line), also books, papers, instruments, and operators. Am now searching for the president and treasurer. The superintendent, A. J. Baldwin, is in New York City.
J. V. BOMFORD,
Lieutenant-Colonel Sixteenth Infantry, &c.
--------
CONFIDENTIAL. ] WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington, City, D.C., May 18, 1864.
Maj. Gen. LEW. WALLACE,
Baltimore:
A forged treasonable document, purporting to be a proclamation by the President, countersigned by the Secretary of State, appeared in the New York World and Journal of Commerce this morning. Make arrangements and seize all the issues of the papers that may arrive at Baltimore by express or mail and prevent their circulation, and report to this Department.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
-----
continued
 
BALTIMORE, May 18, 1864. (Received 9 p.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
Your dispatch arrived after the train from New York and the New York World had already been distributed. I have seized all the copies I could find.
LEW. WALLACE,
Major-General of Volunteers.
------------------
-----
NINTH STREET OFFICE, Washington, May 18, 1864.
(Received 2.15 p.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON:
I have the honor to report that the arrests have been made and offices closed.
THOS. T. ECKERT,
Major and Assistant Superintendent Military Telegraph.
-----
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington City, May 18, 1864--12.30 p.m.
CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS, Esq.,
U.S. Minister Plenipotentiary, London:
Orders have been given for the arrest and punishment of the fabricators and publishers of the spurious proclamation.
WILLIAM H. SEWARD.
(Same to William L. Dayton, Esq., U.S. Minister Plenipotentiary, Paris.)
-----
NEW YORK CITY, May 19, 1864.
(Received 2.30 p.m.)
His Excellency A. LINCOLN,
President of the United Slates:
SIR: The undersigned, editors and publishers of a portion of the daily press of the city of New York, respectfully represent that the leading journals of this city sustain very extended telegraphic news arrangements, under an organization established in 1848 and known as the New York Associated Press, which is controlled by its members, acting through an executive committee, a general agent in this city, and assistant agents immediately responsible to the association at every important news center throughout this country and Europe. Under the above-named organization the rule has always been to transmit by telegraph all intelligence to the office of the general agent in this city, and by him the same is properly prepared for publication, and then written out by manifold process on tissue paper, and a copy of the same is sent simultaneously in sealed envelopes to each of the editors who are entitled to receive the same. From foregoing statement of facts Your Excellency will readily perceive that an ingenious rogue, knowing the manner in which the editors were supplied with much of their telegraphic news, could, by selecting his time and opportunity, easily impose upon editors or compositors the most wicked and fraudulent reports. On Wednesday morning, at about 3 o'clock, a messenger, who well counterfeited the regular messenger of the Associated Press, presented himself at all save one of the editorial rooms of the papers connected with the Associated Press and delivered to the foreman, in the absence of the night editors, sealed envelopes containing manifold papers similar in all respects to that used by the association, upon which was written a fraudulent proclamation, purporting to be signed by Your Excellency and countersigned by the Honorable Secretary of State. The very late hour at which the fraud was perpetrated left no time for consideration as to the authenticity or genuineness of the document, and the copy in most of the offices was at once cut up into small pieces and given into the hands of the compositors, and in two cases the fraud was not discovered or suspected even till after the whole morning editions of the papers were printed off and distributed. The undersigned beg to state to Your Excellency that the fraud, which succeeded with The World and the Journal of Commerce, was one which, from the circumstances attending it and the practices of the Associated Press, was extremely natural and very liable to have succeeded in any daily newspaper establishment in this city, and inasmuch as, in the judgment of the undersigned, the editors and proprietors of the Journal of Commerce and The World were innocent of any knowledge of wrong in the publication of the fraudulent document, and also in view of the fact that the suspension by Your Excellency's orders of the two papers last evening has had the effect to awaken editors and publishers and news agents, telegraph companies, &c., to the propriety of increased vigilance in their several duties, the undersigned respectfully request that Your Excellency will be pleased to rescind the order under which The World and the Journal of Commerce were suppressed.
Respectfully, Your Excellency's obedient servants,
SIDNEY HOWARD GAY,
For Tribune.
ERASTUS BROOKS,
New York Express.
FREDERICK HUDSON,
For JAS. G. BENNETT,
New York Herald.
M. S. BEACH,
New York Sun.
----------------------------------
NEW YORK, May 19, 1864.
(Received 10.40 a.m.)
Hon. E. M. STANTON:
SIR: I have the honor to report that the Secretary of State's dispatch to Ministers Adams and Dayton was delivered to the purser of the Scotia, and that he was ordered by Mr. Cunard to telegraph it from Queenstown. Slips were issued by some of the morning papers exposing the forgery, and circulated among the passengers before the vessel sailed.
Very respectfully,
E. S. SANFORD.
-----
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington, D.C., May 19, 1864.
Major-General WALLACE,
Baltimore:
The President directs that you take military possession of the telegraph line known as the Independent or Inland Telegraph and its offices and instruments, materials, papers, and dispatches. The principal office is No. 21 South street. The papers and dispatches you will forward to Colonel Wisewell, Military Governor. The agents, superintendents, and operators you will arrest and parole them to appear before you when required. You will place a guard in the offices and prevent any telegraphing.
By order of the President:
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.
-----
NEW YORK, May 20, 1864.
Hon. E. M. STANTON:
I have arrested and am sending to Fort Lafayette Joseph Howard, the author of the forged proclamation. He is a newspaper reporter, and is known as " 'Howard,' of the Times." He has been very frank in his confession--says it was a stock-jobbing operation, and that no person connected with the press had any agency in the transaction except another reporter, who took manifolds and distributed the proclamation to the newspapers, and whose arrest I have ordered. He exonerates the Independent Telegraph Line, and says that publication on a steamer day was accidental. His statement in all essential particulars is corroborated by other testimony.
JOHN A. DIX,
Major-General.
-----
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington City, May 20, 1864--9.10 p.m.
Major-General DIX,
New York:
Your telegram respecting the arrest of Howard has been received and submitted to the President. He directs me to say that while, in his opinion, the editors, proprietors, and publishers of The World and Journal of Commerce are responsible for what appears in their papers injurious to the public service, and have no right to shield themselves behind a plea of ignorance or want of criminal intent, yet he is not disposed to visit them with vindictive punishment; and hoping they will exercise more caution and regard for the public welfare in future, he authorizes you to restore to them their respective establishments.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.

--------
WAR DEPARTMENT,
Washington City, May 20, 1864--1 p.m.
Major-General DIX,
New York:
You will please proceed immediately to take the examination of the telegraph operators, superintendents, and officers that may have been arrested by you under order of this Department, taking their statements and examination in writing, and, if satisfied that they have had no complicity nor part in the transmission or perpetration of the forgery of the President's proclamation, published in The World and Journal of Commerce, you will discharge them, but holding in arrest any against whom any evidence may appear and reporting the same.
EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.

continued
 
-----
PROVOST-MARSHAL-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
Washington, D.C., May 20, 1864.
Hon. EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War:
SIR: The various acts passed between June, 1861, and February, 1864, prescribed among other details the number of men which might be called out. The first section of the amendatory enrollment act, approved February 24, 1864, however, says:
That the President of the United States shall be authorized, whenever he shall deem it necessary during the present war, to call for such number of men for the military service of the United States as the public exigencies may require.
I understand that under this the President can call for as many men as he deems necessary and prescribe their term of service, and that all such men will be entitled to the various bounties provided in former acts for the number of men specified in such acts.
The bounties authorized at this time by existing laws for volunteers called into service for different periods of time are as follows:
First. Volunteers for three years or the war for old or new regiments are entitled to $100 bounty.
Second. Volunteers for two years for old or new regiments (if discharged honorably after a service of two years or during the war) are entitled to $100 bounty.
Third. Volunteer infantry for nine months are entitled to $25 bounty. Troops called out in accordance with the foregoing may be formed into new organizations without impairing their claim to bounty.
Fourth. For the purpose of filling up the regiments of infantry in the U.S. service, volunteer recruits may be raised for one year. They are entitled to $50 bounty.
I find no law which provides bounty for new organizations raised for one year's service.
It might be well in case a new call is made to authorize the acceptance of volunteer recruits to serve for two years in old infantry regiments with $100 bounty, or to serve for one year with $50 bounty, as the recruit may desire, and to accept the services of such new infantry organizations for two years as the Governors may desire to undertake to raise within a designated time. New organizations if raised now for one year's service would go out at the most critical season next year if the war continues, and, as heretofore stated, get no U.S. bounty.
For whatever term of service the volunteer may be accepted, the case should be accompanied by an order to draft all the deficiency and hold the men so drafted for three-years' service. This would be an additional inducement to fill quotas by volunteers and thus escape draft.
I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
JAMES B. FRY,
Provost-Marshal-General.
-----

There was a proper war time investigation of fraudulant publications using the President's name; as well as Secretary of War Stanton's name. One has to read the entire sequence to see that once the bad guys were identified, the poisoned publications seized and held as evidence; those found innocent were allowed to resume their business. Under the circumstances to maintain control of a situation, it has to be frozen as if a crime scene; and it is clear that the bigger bosses of these publications had no knowledge and were just as embarrassed by it and acknowledged the importance of keeping a tighter rein on reports and their credibility.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted for consideration,
M. E. Wolf
 
Flatly wrong. Nothing Lincoln did before the Confederate violent assault on Ft. Sumter justifies this. Everything done after that is caused by this illegal Confederate action.



Flatly wrong. This is simply a bunch of hogwash from a Constitutional Law standpoint.



He certainly did amidst the emergencies of a war forced on him by rebellion. Everyone knows that he did, and quite possibly his actions were un-Constitutional if there had been no war on at the time. The unprecedented rebellion of the Confederacy is what caused the recognition of widespread Emergency Powers for the President in our history.



Flatly wrong. Lincoln never declared war, although he ended up fighting one because of Confederate aggression.



Flatly wrong. Congress passed legislation admitting West Virginia into the United States, not Lincoln.



Flatly wrong. Actually, Lincoln released Valandingham from prison after he discovered Burnside had imprisoned him, sending him through the Confederate lines, after which Vallandingham went to Canada. That was in 1863. Vallandingham then ran for Governor of Ohio in Fall 1863 and lost, and was included on the McClellan Fall 1864 campaign as the proposed Secretary of War; Vallandingham wrote the "Peace Plank" of the Democratic platform. After the war he lost Ohio elections for US Senate and House of Representatives.



Flatly wrong. This is not a violation of Constitutional Law. The only thing it does is raise the troubles in the US from a police action against insurgents to a war of rebellion -- which is why the major European powers recognized the Confederates as "belligerents" (i.e., an organized group fighting a war).

In addition, please note that President Jefferson had effectively blockaded all US ports against trade with the British and French under the Embargo Acts of 1807 and 1808, authorizing port authorities to grab ships and cargoes without warrant.

In February 1864 the US Supreme Court ruled in had no power to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus against a military commission in this case.



Flatly wrong. I think you've been through this matter in detail before (unless, possibly, I am confusing you with Battalion) and already know better than this.



Come now: Congress voted authority to confiscate the slaves of rebels and required the military to protect them from retrieval. Any slaves freed by Lincoln's proclamations were under granted authority to punish rebels. This is flatly wrong. Later legislation and Amendment went even further than Lincoln did, making the whole matter moot.

Tim

'Guess most of that was flatly wrong, huh?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGhost Expired Image Removed
"I felt that measures otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the Constitution through the preservation of the Nation. Right or wrong, I assumed this ground and now avow it."

-Old Abe

...and that would be a bad thing right?

Ghost, I'm serious, if the Confederacy had won her independence, then a rebellion began within it comprised of several states forming their own confederation, it would be wrong for Davis to take these same measures to preserve the CSA? It was wrong for Lincoln to implement them to preserve the Union, according to you, so I assume it be wrong for Davis as well, correct? In fact, I'm assuming you think these measures are too extreme for use in any case of a rebellion against any democratically elected government, to preserve that government, right?

Btw, didn't Davis also imprison dissenters and close some papers in the south during the rebellion?





Lee
Not making any judgement whether this is good or bad.

Someone earlier stated that Lincoln admitted to violating the Constitution. Other posters denied it.
 
Not making any judgement whether this is good or bad.

Someone earlier stated that Lincoln admitted to violating the Constitution. Other posters denied it.

And this was not an admission he violated the Constitution.

Regards,
Cash
 
From the 1863 Prize Cases, the Supreme Court states:

"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 the Court must be governed by the decisions and acts of the political department of the Government to which this power was entrusted."

From the essay by Benjamin Kleinerman, "Lincoln's Example: Executive Power and the Survival of Constitutionalism," 808, he offers a broad legal, constitutional, and political overview of Lincoln's presidency. He has distilled three principles to be learned from Lincoln's example of constitutionalism.

1. Action outside and sometimes against the Constitution is only constitutional when the constitutional union itself is at risk; a concern for the public good is insufficient grounds for the executive to exercise discretionary power.

2. The Constitution should be understood as different during extraordinary times than during ordinary times; thus discretionary action should take place only in extraordinary circumstances and should be understood as extraordinary. Since it is only necessitated by the crisis, the action should have no effect on the existing law. To preserve constitutionalism after the crisis, the actions must not be regularized or institutionalized.

3. A line must separate the executive's personal feeling and his official duty. He should take only those actions that fulfill his official duty, the preservation of the Constitution, even, or especially, if the people want him to go further.

Thomas Jefferson wrote John B. Colvin in a letter dated September 20, 1810:

"The question you propose, whether circumstances do not sometimes occur, which make it a duty in officers of high trust, to assume authorities beyond the law, is easy of solution in principle, but sometimes embarrassing in practice. A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

Jefferson's entire letter may be found at the following website:

http://www.teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=1916

In other words, Lincoln did not subvert the Constitution.

He saved it.

Unionblue
 
"I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might become lawful, by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the constitution, through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that, to the best of my ability, I had even tried to preserve the constitutionm, if, to save slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government, country, and Constituion all together."(my emphasis) Letter to A.G. Hodges, Apr. 4, 1864
From the context of the whole letter, the above quote would seem to concern the Emancipation Proclamation.
 
Back
Top