Restricted The Case of the South against the North

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

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,822
Location
los angeles ca
The reason the Commissioners were sent was to do whatever necessary to seek peace whatever it took and that was an order directly from President Davis. There was NO LAW to challenge or to negotiate over secession.
What case or statutory law authorized the Southern States to secede? Justice Taney wrote that the secessionists had no legal right to secede. The Supreme Court absolutely decided based on antebellum law that Secession was illegal per Texas v.White.
Leftyhunter
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Eric Calistri

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
3,092
Location
Austin Texas
The reason the Commissioners were sent was to do whatever necessary to seek peace whatever it took and that was an order directly from President Davis. There was NO LAW to challenge or to negotiate over secession.
You are mistaken, there is an entire body of law which secession attempts to overthrow. Every single one of these laws has supremacy over "any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State" thus making the ordnances of secession legally null.


Lincoln is constrained by the US Constitution, under which the powers of Congress (To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Building) and the Courts (The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;—between a State and Citizens of another State;10 —between Citizens of different States, —between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects) are clearly defined.


As you state there is no "secession law" that changes any of this in any way. The legal approach to secession was though Congress and/or the courts. The secessionists instead chose artillery fire, thus starting the war, as they well knew, and you know as well.

Gen Sherman hit the nail on the head " those who believe a delusion, believe it stronger than a real thing."
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
6,820
Location
About 47 miles Northwest of the Canadian border
Look at the Territory he exempted from it. He kept in Slavery everone he could of Freeded except SC Coastal area and those who crossed over and Joined up. Many in LA, TN and MS river area had walked off the job at the sound of the guns. They were exempted from the EP
Correct, but if they made it to a Union camp or facility in any area of the so called confederate States, they were not exempt under the Second Confiscation Act or the March 13, 1862 Congressional Act that prohibited the return of escaped slaves.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
33,529
Location
Right here.
Look at the Territory he exempted from it. He kept in Slavery everone he could of Freeded except SC Coastal area and those who crossed over and Joined up. Many in LA, TN and MS river area had walked off the job at the sound of the guns. They were exempted from the EP
We dealt with the phony claim people were re-enslaved here: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-great-emancipator-emancipated-what.1214/page-2#post-1963972

Protective Tariffs were supposed to be Temporary. They were made permanent and expanded.
Another fake history claim belied by the Walker Tariff.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,427
the Southern Commissioners could have negotiated through Justice Cambell side issues for some time
Thanks for your response.
That is one of the more successful strategies in successful negotiation. It is not uncommon to begin with a vast divide between the parties and 'non-negotiable issues'. So the parties identify areas where they are not so far apart, agree on them, building trust and familiarity that only success breeds. Then they can attack the more difficult issues with a common purpose.
As you correctly pointed out, there was no way this could develop in the 'my way or the highway' attitude that prevailed among the parties.
 

byron ed

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 22, 2017
Messages
2,684
Location
Midwest
The first one would be John Brown.
uh, your funnin' with us again :wink:. As you well know, let's say American History 101: John Brown was an Abolitionist - one who promoted and agitated for the abolition of slavery. He was also an "Underground Railroad Conductor" - one who actively assisted fugitive slaves in their journey to freedom, and he was a Terrorist - one who employed deadly methods to accomplish their vision.

But Abolitionist or "UGRR Conductor" or Terrorist: none of these was ever equated by any published historian, or even by anybody of common majority here, with being a "Fire Eater."

So jest aside, and for the benefit of the uninitiated:

"Fire Eater" was the period slang describing one who actively promoted and agitated for Secession, and nothing else. The term is documented Antebellum past history; indelible and unchangeable.
 
Last edited:
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,427
Just think of Sumpter as being a Tax Revolt. Here come the Tax Collectors. I'm an Accountant. I would of jerked the Lanyard. Part of the Romance of the Confederacy.
If we are going to better understand each other, we need accurate analogies: "Tax Revolt" is not an accurate analogy.
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,427
In case you don't know, that was attempted by the South. Lincoln would have no part of it on count of his impost.
When in the crisis of 1860-61 did any official of a Southern state file a lawsuit to adjudicate any of their alleged complaints?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,427
And you think Lincoln was going to abide that fine sounding rhetoric if the CS states remained obstinate about an independent country of their own?
At the time that the 1860 Republican Platform was written, no state had seceded. That particular 'plank' was a strong endorsement of States Rights, something we are so often told was of paramount importance to Southerners.
 
Top