Restricted Debate The creation of West Virginia


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

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
When was the formation of West Virginia challenged and approved by the Supreme Court?
Legality
The constitutionality of the new state was achieved when the Unionist government of Virginia approved the division. The question of the addition of two counties came before the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Virginia v. West Virginia, 78 U.S. 39 (1871).[23] Berkeley and Jefferson counties lying on the Potomac east of the mountains, in 1863, with the consent of the Reorganized government of Virginia voted in favor of annexation to West Virginia. Many men absent in the Confederate army when the vote was taken refused to acknowledge the transfer upon their return. The Virginia General Assembly repealed the act of cession and in 1866 brought suit against West Virginia asking the court to declare the two counties a part of Virginia. Meanwhile, Congress on March 10, 1866, passed a joint resolution recognizing the transfer. The Supreme Court decided in favor of West Virginia, and there has been no further question.​
 

NedBaldwin

Major
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
7,631
Location
California
North-western Virginia was part of Virginia at the time of secession.
Not clear what your point is.

"Conversely, if secession of Virginia was illegal according to US law" ...

- Virginia was claiming it could remove itself from the US.

"how could the secession of north-western Virginia comply with the same US law?"

- Northwestern Virginia was claiming it could form a new state within the US.

Two entirely different legal concepts.
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,728
Location
Laurinburg NC
Not clear what your point is.

"Conversely, if secession of Virginia was illegal according to US law" ...

- Virginia was claiming it could remove itself from the US.

"how could the secession of north-western Virginia comply with the same US law?"

- Northwestern Virginia was claiming it could form a new state within the US.

Two entirely different legal concepts.
It was two legal concepts alright and both interpreted by the US to benefit the US. The Lincoln regime wasn't adverse to gaining new territory by any mean expedient, just adverse to losing territory.
 

RochesterBill

Corporal
Joined
Oct 11, 2016
Messages
330
It was two legal concepts alright and both interpreted by the US to benefit the US. The Lincoln regime wasn't adverse to gaining new territory by any mean expedient, just adverse to losing territory.
1) Show me the government anywhere and any time in World History that did or does not interpret the laws totheir own benefit. Indeed, the whole PURPOSE of laws is to benefit the commonweal.

2) The Federal government was not grabbing new land, they were reestablishing governmental authoirty over land which had been under said authority for almost 90 years.

3) Calling it "the Lincoln regime" does not change the fact that it was the duly elected government of the ENTIRE US, not some junta that took over via a coup. Perhaps if you keep that fact - FACT, not opinion - in mind you'llbe able to judge their actions more clearly.
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
1) Show me the government anywhere and any time in World History that did or does not interpret the laws totheir own benefit. Indeed, the whole PURPOSE of laws is to benefit the commonweal.

2) The Federal government was not grabbing new land, they were reestablishing governmental authoirty over land which had been under said authority for almost 90 years.

3) Calling it "the Lincoln regime" does not change the fact that it was the duly elected government of the ENTIRE US, not some junta that took over via a coup. Perhaps if you keep that fact - FACT, not opinion - in mind you'llbe able to judge their actions more clearly.
Good rebuttal IMHO
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,728
Location
Laurinburg NC
1) Show me the government anywhere and any time in World History that did or does not interpret the laws totheir own benefit. Indeed, the whole PURPOSE of laws is to benefit the commonweal.

2) The Federal government was not grabbing new land, they were reestablishing governmental authoirty over land which had been under said authority for almost 90 years.

3) Calling it "the Lincoln regime" does not change the fact that it was the duly elected government of the ENTIRE US, not some junta that took over via a coup. Perhaps if you keep that fact - FACT, not opinion - in mind you'llbe able to judge their actions more clearly.
I have never suggested that any of this wasn't the US government's mindset, I would only add that the people of the Confederate States felt about as much bound by US constitutional law or any other alien law than did the British colonial secessionists almost 90 years before.
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,805
Location
los angeles ca
Legality
The constitutionality of the new state was achieved when the Unionist government of Virginia approved the division. The question of the addition of two counties came before the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of Virginia v. West Virginia, 78 U.S. 39 (1871).[23] Berkeley and Jefferson counties lying on the Potomac east of the mountains, in 1863, with the consent of the Reorganized government of Virginia voted in favor of annexation to West Virginia. Many men absent in the Confederate army when the vote was taken refused to acknowledge the transfer upon their return. The Virginia General Assembly repealed the act of cession and in 1866 brought suit against West Virginia asking the court to declare the two counties a part of Virginia. Meanwhile, Congress on March 10, 1866, passed a joint resolution recognizing the transfer. The Supreme Court decided in favor of West Virginia, and there has been no further question.​
@19thGeorgia ,
@jgoodguy s answer should satisfy your question.
Leftyhunter
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,728
Location
Laurinburg NC
[
The Colonies were never part of the United Kingdom. The Colonial Americans never had the right to vote for members of Parliament. The Colonial Americans did not serve in the King's Cabinet. The reasons for the Revolutionary War have both to do with the ACW.
Leftyhunter
I agree, both the colonists and Southerners had grievances, determined by themselves, against the then existing governments.
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
I have never suggested that any of this wasn't the US government's mindset, I would only add that the people of the Confederate States felt about as much bound by US constitutional law or any other alien law than did the British colonial secessionists almost 90 years before.
Excluding slaves and Unionists of course.
 

GwilymT

Sergeant
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Messages
667
Location
Pittsburgh
Edited


Conversely, if secession of Virginia was illegal according to US law how could the secession of north-western Virginia comply with the same US law? It appears the US government was making law to suit its puposes.
Because they secured the blessing of the recognized government of Virginia and the Congress, thus satisfying the Constitution. The rebel government in Richmond had no say in the matter.
 


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