The People... or the State.

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,134
That is a good point. Unilateral secession or other "secession" outside of law secession does trample on the rights of the remaining States. All the stuff that the Confederacy seized belong to all the States and the secessionist converted common property to their property.
Thanks. It isn't one we hear often, but it is true (at least in societies like the United States): all rights are limited by the rights of others.
 

(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,229
Nice to quote the Constitution, but what bearing exactly does it have.
I have a question that has not been explained ,if the war was about slavery or territories or states vs federal authority-why did families on either North,South,or West take opposite sides at the time of the secession.Brothers ,uncles,or cousins would die on different sides.These differences would continue following the war,esp. along the border states.Could we be overlooking or even not taking into consideration over time which these issues had inside families. Individuals make families. families make communities,communities make states,states cam be sectional (political and social} states make unions but the states have their own needs and history just as the individual,
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,838
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
I have a question that has not been explained ,if the war was about slavery or territories or states vs federal authority-why did families on either North,South,or West take opposite sides at the time of the secession.Brothers ,uncles,or cousins would die on different sides.These differences would continue following the war,esp. along the border states.Could we be overlooking or even not taking into consideration over time which these issues had inside families. Individuals make families. families make communities,communities make states,states cam be sectional (political and social} states make unions but the states have their own needs and history just as the individual,
Seems like human nature in any civil war, a war of conquest or a major defeat. I see nothing extraordinary about the American experience different from other wars.
 

John S. Carter

First Sergeant
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
1,229
The war itself, was about whether the states claiming secession were actually out of the Union, or Not.

.
At Lee's surrender was not one of the terms that Lee signed off on was that the Confederacy did not have the right to succeed {that secession was unconstitutional } or some agreement to that effect? If this is the case that the States of the Confederacy were out of the Union and by agreeing to this term meant that they were out of the Union something that Lincoln never admitted to or was this a jester to Confederacy that they now with defeat the issue was resolved and Lee places the issue of right of succession brayed as for the South.? Did Lincoln give to Grant this authority to place this in the surrender terms and did Sherman do so with Johnson?Then did Jeffferson give the authority to Lee to negotiate Confederacy surrender with these terms?
 
Last edited:

trice

Lt. Colonel
Joined
May 2, 2006
Messages
11,134
At Lee's surrender was not one of the terms that Lee signed off on was that the Confederacy did not have the right to succeed {that secession was unconstitutional } or some agreement to that effect? If this is the case that the States of the Confederacy were out of the Union and by agreeing to this term meant that they were out of the Union something that Lincoln never admitted to or was this a jester to Confederacy that they now with defeat the issue was resolved and Lee places the issue of right of succession brayed as for the South.? Did Lincoln give to Grant this authority to place this in the surrender terms and did Sherman do so with Johnson?Then did Jeffferson give the authority to Lee to negotiate Confederacy surrender with these terms?
Here is a link to the Lee Surrender Terms at Appomattox. Nothing at all is said about secession.
 

jackt62

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Jul 28, 2015
Messages
2,958
Location
New York City
At Lee's surrender was not one of the terms that Lee signed off on was that the Confederacy did not have the right to succeed {that secession was unconstitutional } or some agreement to that effect? If this is the case that the States of the Confederacy were out of the Union and by agreeing to this term meant that they were out of the Union something that Lincoln never admitted to or was this a jester to Confederacy that they now with defeat the issue was resolved and Lee places the issue of right of succession brayed as for the South.? Did Lincoln give to Grant this authority to place this in the surrender terms and did Sherman do so with Johnson?Then did Jeffferson give the authority to Lee to negotiate Confederacy surrender with these terms?
The surrender terms at Appomatox were strictly confined to military matters only. Grant did not have the authority to treat on issues of secession, status of the seceded states, and related affairs. In contrast, Sherman subsequently blundered in setting surrender terms with Joe Johnston for the Army of Tennessee, which considered political matters such as recognizing existing state governments and providing for the maintenance of property rights. When President Johnson and the cabinet were advised on these terms, they were roundly condemned and disavowed and Sherman was forced to deliver the same kind of terms to Johnston that Grant offered to Lee.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,039
At Lee's surrender was not one of the terms that Lee signed off on was that the Confederacy did not have the right to succeed {that secession was unconstitutional } or some agreement to that effect? If this is the case that the States of the Confederacy were out of the Union and by agreeing to this term meant that they were out of the Union something that Lincoln never admitted to or was this a jester to Confederacy that they now with defeat the issue was resolved and Lee places the issue of right of succession brayed as for the South.? Did Lincoln give to Grant this authority to place this in the surrender terms and did Sherman do so with Johnson?Then did Jeffferson give the authority to Lee to negotiate Confederacy surrender with these terms?

As other posters have answered the military question of Lee's surrender, I will only state a little further, in that the political reality of the situation, was that, with Davis refusing to discuss the status of secession and Lincoln(and, Buchanan) refusing to discuss the status of the Union, there was nothing to discuss.

Davis broke the impasse by initiating war, making that conflict the arbiter of who was right. Were the seceding states out of the Union as Davis claimed, or, were they still in the Union as Lincoln claimed.

The result of the ruled in Lincoln's favor.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,838
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
As other posters have answered the military question of Lee's surrender, I will only state a little further, in that the political reality of the situation, was that, with Davis refusing to discuss the status of secession and Lincoln(and, Buchanan) refusing to discuss the status of the Union, there was nothing to discuss.

Davis broke the impasse by initiating war, making that conflict the arbiter of who was right. Were the seceding states out of the Union as Davis claimed, or, were they still in the Union as Lincoln claimed.

The result of the ruled in Lincoln's favor.
I'd mention that by Lee's surrender, Richmond had fallen and what was left of the CSA government was on the road fleeing Union forces.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,039
I'd mention that by Lee's surrender, Richmond had fallen and what was left of the CSA government was on the road fleeing Union forces.


I agree. But, Lincoln, IMO, was just following proper form. If Lincoln would not admit there was a csa at the beginning and during the War, it is certain he would not at its end.
 
I agree. But, Lincoln, IMO, was just following proper form. If Lincoln would not admit there was a csa at the beginning and during the War, it is certain he would not at its end.
From the moment each of the Southern states attempted to secede and form a pretend nation, they had zero, zilch, legal standing as a sovereign here or with the international community since not a single nation recognized them as such. They were nothing more than states in rebellion.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,838
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
From the moment each of the Southern states attempted to secede and form a pretend nation, they had zero, zilch, legal standing as a sovereign here or with the international community since not a single nation recognized them as such. They were nothing more than states in rebellion.
Persons in rebellion. IMHO not States.
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,039
From the moment each of the Southern states attempted to secede and form a pretend nation, they had zero, zilch, legal standing as a sovereign here or in the international community since not a single nation recognized them as such. They were nothing more than states in rebellion.


Agreed, and as a general rule, it is considered bad form(if not, dangerous) for Generals in the field to decide political issues, in their negotiations with the enemy. Lincoln(and Davis) was particularly toutchy about that.
 
Love to see those numerous "states in rebellion" quotes.
As it turned out I can find only two instances where my search results came back with numerous hits that turned out when opened to be the author's phrase when explaining a document or speech. These are the only two I could readily find that has Lincoln stating "states in rebellion" (my bold):

July 8, 1864
By the President of the United States.
A Proclamation.

Whereas, at the late Session, Congress passed a Bill, "To guarantee to certain States, whose governments have been usurped or overthrown, a republican form of Government,'' a copy of which is hereunto annexed:

And whereas, the said Bill was presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, less than one hour before the sine die adjournment of said Session, and was not signed by him:

And whereas, the said Bill contains, among other things, a plan for restoring the States in rebellion to their proper practical relation in the Union, which plan expresses the sense of Congress upon that subject, and which plan it is now thought fit to lay before the people for their consideration:

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do proclaim, declare, and make known, that, while I am, (as I was in December last, when by proclamation I propounded a plan for restoration) unprepared, by a formal approval of this Bill, to be inflexibly committed to any single plan of restoration; and, while I am also unprepared to declare, that the free-state constitutions and governments, already adopted and installed in Arkansas and Louisiana, shall be set aside and held for nought, thereby repelling and discouraging the loyal citizens who have set up the same, as to further effort; or to declare a constitutional competency in Congress to abolish slavery in States, but am at the same time sincerely hoping and expecting that a constitutional amendment, abolishing slavery throughout the nation, may be adopted, nevertheless, I am fully satisfied with the system for restoration contained in the Bill, as one very proper plan for the loyal people of any State choosing to adopt it; and that I am, and at all times shall be, prepared to give the Executive aid and assistance to any such people, so soon as the military resistance to the United States shall have been suppressed in any such State, and the people thereof shall have sufficiently returned to their obedience to the Constitution and the laws of the United States,---in which cases, military Governors will be appointed, with directions to proceed according to the Bill.

In testimony 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 eighth day of July, in the year of Our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and sixty four, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-ninth.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

By the President:

WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt from July 12, 1862 letter to the Border States Representatives in regards to compensated Emancipation

July 12, 1862
Gentlemen. After the adjournment of Congress, now very near, I shall have no opportunity of seeing you for several months. Believing that you of the border-states hold more power for good than any other equal number of members, I feel it a duty which I can not justifiably waive, to make this appeal to you. I intend no reproach or complaint when I assure you that in my opinion, if you all had voted for the resolution in the gradual emancipation message of last March, the war would now be substantially ended. And the plan therein proposed is yet one of the most potent, and swift means of ending it. Let the states which are in rebellion see, definitely and certainly, that, in no event, will the states you represent ever join their proposed Confederacy, and they can not, much longer maintain the contest. But you can not divest them of their hope to ultimately have you with them so long as you show a determination to perpetuate the institution within your own states. Beat them at elections, as you have overwhelmingly done, and, nothing daunted, they still claim you as their own. You and I know what the lever of their power is. Break that lever before their faces, and they can shake you no more forever.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
34,838
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
As it turned out I can find only two instances where my search results came back with numerous hits that turned out when opened to be the author's phrase when explaining a document or speech. These are the only two I could readily find that has Lincoln stating "states in rebellion" (my bold):

July 8, 1864
By the President of the United States.
A Proclamation.

Whereas, at the late Session, Congress passed a Bill, "To guarantee to certain States, whose governments have been usurped or overthrown, a republican form of Government,'' a copy of which is hereunto annexed:

And whereas, the said Bill was presented to the President of the United States, for his approval, less than one hour before the sine die adjournment of said Session, and was not signed by him:

And whereas, the said Bill contains, among other things, a plan for restoring the States in rebellion to their proper practical relation in the Union, which plan expresses the sense of Congress upon that subject, and which plan it is now thought fit to lay before the people for their consideration:

Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do proclaim, declare, and make known, that, while I am, (as I was in December last, when by proclamation I propounded a plan for restoration) unprepared, by a formal approval of this Bill, to be inflexibly committed to any single plan of restoration; and, while I am also unprepared to declare, that the free-state constitutions and governments, already adopted and installed in Arkansas and Louisiana, shall be set aside and held for nought, thereby repelling and discouraging the loyal citizens who have set up the same, as to further effort; or to declare a constitutional competency in Congress to abolish slavery in States, but am at the same time sincerely hoping and expecting that a constitutional amendment, abolishing slavery throughout the nation, may be adopted, nevertheless, I am fully satisfied with the system for restoration contained in the Bill, as one very proper plan for the loyal people of any State choosing to adopt it; and that I am, and at all times shall be, prepared to give the Executive aid and assistance to any such people, so soon as the military resistance to the United States shall have been suppressed in any such State, and the people thereof shall have sufficiently returned to their obedience to the Constitution and the laws of the United States,---in which cases, military Governors will be appointed, with directions to proceed according to the Bill.

In testimony 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 eighth day of July, in the year of Our Lord, one thousand eight hundred and sixty four, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-ninth.
ABRAHAM LINCOLN.

By the President:

WILLIAM H. SEWARD, Secretary of State.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excerpt from July 12, 1862 letter to the Border States Representatives in regards to compensated Emancipation

July 12, 1862
Gentlemen. After the adjournment of Congress, now very near, I shall have no opportunity of seeing you for several months. Believing that you of the border-states hold more power for good than any other equal number of members, I feel it a duty which I can not justifiably waive, to make this appeal to you. I intend no reproach or complaint when I assure you that in my opinion, if you all had voted for the resolution in the gradual emancipation message of last March, the war would now be substantially ended. And the plan therein proposed is yet one of the most potent, and swift means of ending it. Let the states which are in rebellion see, definitely and certainly, that, in no event, will the states you represent ever join their proposed Confederacy, and they can not, much longer maintain the contest. But you can not divest them of their hope to ultimately have you with them so long as you show a determination to perpetuate the institution within your own states. Beat them at elections, as you have overwhelmingly done, and, nothing daunted, they still claim you as their own. You and I know what the lever of their power is. Break that lever before their faces, and they can shake you no more forever.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks!
 
Actually I've been trying to get out of here while I made my last 3 or 4 posts so I was in a hurry trying to search online for Lincoln speeches and documents. I must head out now and head in to work but later this evening I'm going to search all my downloaded Lincoln war time speeches and proclamations to see if he used "states in rebellion" more than the two times I've already posted. Either way, later tonight I'll post what I found or advise if I didn't find anything else.
 



(Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
Top