The Trial That Didn’t Happen -- Did Robert E. Lee commit treason?


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

Viper21

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,326
Location
Rockbridge County, Virginia
#42
But if one pleads not guilty, one forfeits the pardon, therefore accepting the pardon is seen as an admission of guilt.

Accepting a pardon is an admission that the individual was guilty:
Perhaps you can show were Lee accepted a pardon. I'll wait.....

"On October 2, 1865, the same day that Lee was inaugurated as president of Washington College in Lexington, Virginia, he signed his Amnesty Oath, thereby complying fully with the provision of Johnson's proclamation. But Lee was not pardoned, nor was his citizenship restored. And the fact that he had submitted an amnesty oath at all was soon lost to history"
https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/spring/piece-lee

lee-amnesty-l.jpg


Lee signed his Amnesty Oath on October 2, 1865, but was not restored to full citizenship in his lifetime. (General Records of the Department of State, RG 59)
 

uaskme

Sergeant Major
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
2,064
#43
They should of hung the lady cotton mill workers from Marietta. That would of taught em a lesson!

How do you think Johnson’s Political Aspirations would of been affected if Lee had of been hung?

Just like the War. Had a War to Justify an Election, then we had a Election to Justify a War. Then White Forgiveness to get us back to where we started. All Politics!
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,967
#44
Eh, I was just answering the title of the thread. Barring all the legal wrangling I think it is hard to argue that Lee and the other Confederates didn't commit treason. Now it's the same sort of treason that Washington committed, and in both cases it doesn't have any negative baring on my opinons of them. I'm going to call a spade a spade though.
So will I.
 

19thGeorgia

2nd Lieutenant
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
2,773
#45
The Trial That Didn’t Happen

John C. Underwood, Underwood impaneled a grand jury in Norfolk that issued an indictment for treason involving Lee.
That was until five days later, when President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated at Ford’s Theatre. At once, the new president, Andrew Johnson, and his attorney general, James Speed, decided that Grant “had no authority” to offer anything like a pardon to Lee. The Appomattox paroles were “a mere military arrangement and can have no influence upon civil rights or the status of the persons interested,” in the words of John C. Underwood. And on June 2, Underwood, the sole functioning federal district judge in Virginia, impaneled a grand jury in Norfolk (which had been occupied by Union forces since 1862) that issued an indictment for treason involving Lee, his two sons (both Confederate generals), and 34 other high-ranking Confederates. Underwood, a Unionist Virginian who had suffered personally at Confederate hands, was in deadly earnest: Lee “did maliciously and traitorously . . . ordain and carry on war against the United States of America.”​
I have read the Underwood picked the jury. I don't think that's the usual process.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#46
I have read the Underwood picked the jury. I don't think that's the usual process.
Fifth Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury​
The procedure is that the federal district court does this.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#47
I have read the Underwood picked the jury. I don't think that's the usual process.
If the issue is the composition of a Grand Jury, a judge can pick the members of a grand jury in the 19th century; the purpose of a Grand Jury is to determine if there is enough evidence to warrant a trial. No defense is present. Even today it is said that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.
 

Patrick H

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Messages
10,109
#49
This discussion makes me think of a related question: Do we assume Lee resigned himself to being hanged when he decided to surrender? Do we know from any of his writings or discussions with staff? I'm thinking of the period when he knew the war was lost, but before he actually talked with Grant.
 

jgoodguy

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Retired Moderator
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,552
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
#53
As with Jefferson Davis, there was no way to convict Lee of wrongdoing in a Court of Law, because he had committed no crime.
Welcome Paterson.

Judging by this post, you're going to be real popular around here :cool:

(btw.... I agree)
Maybe some members will get together and make a thread with evidence and references. Otherwise thanks for the comments.
 

cash

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
33,528
Location
Right here.
#55
Perhaps you can show were Lee accepted a pardon. I'll wait.....

"On October 2, 1865, the same day that Lee was inaugurated as president of Washington College in Lexington, Virginia, he signed his Amnesty Oath, thereby complying fully with the provision of Johnson's proclamation. But Lee was not pardoned, nor was his citizenship restored. And the fact that he had submitted an amnesty oath at all was soon lost to history"
https://www.archives.gov/publications/prologue/2005/spring/piece-lee

View attachment 259159

Lee signed his Amnesty Oath on October 2, 1865, but was not restored to full citizenship in his lifetime. (General Records of the Department of State, RG 59)
Lee applied for a pardon, which means he was prepared to accept it.
 



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