1. Welcome to the CivilWarTalk, a forum for questions and discussions about the American Civil War! Become a member today for full access to all of our resources, it's fast, simple, and absolutely free!
Dismiss Notice
Join and Become a Patron at CivilWarTalk!
Support this site with a monthly or yearly subscription! Active Patrons get to browse the site Ad free!
START BY JOINING NOW!

What gave Lincoln the right to make an unconstitutional demand on the seceding Southern States?

Discussion in 'Civil War History - Secession and Politics' started by CSA Today, Feb 23, 2017.

  1. John S. Carter

    John S. Carter Cadet

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Maywe go back to Madison and Jefferson had to say about states having the right to void federal laws.That a state which knew a law to violate that state's rights had a right to void or to possible to suceeed ?
     

  2. (Membership has it privileges! To remove this ad: Register NOW!)
  3. GELongstreet

    GELongstreet 1st Lieutenant Trivia Game Winner

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    Messages:
    3,791
    Location:
    Germany
    Maybe I´ve just overread it, which is well possible since I merely overflew the thread looking for it, but has the original text of this "unconstitutional demand" been given here or linked yet?
     
    OpnCoronet likes this.
  4. John S. Carter

    John S. Carter Cadet

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    The question , which has not been answered,is the Constitution a contract ? If it is such then if one side violates that contract or threaten to do so, in this case protection of the rights of the states,then does the contract become null and void? Why did Lincoln think that he needed to call up so many troops when there was no real reason.Was he following the example of Jackson,against South Carolina ?Prehabs he thought that by doing this the other states would not see this as an act of overt agggresion,which they did.Prehabs the out states would return once shown force .In doing this Lincoln accomplished what had been treated for so long by both North/Eastern politcal powers and Southern radicals.The question is not if he had the authority,but was he the person who Destiney sellected to end the GAME OF POLITCAL POWER? All wars have started by men who do not see the conceques of their actions.They are not the ones who have to stand in line , they are not the ones who have to lead men into the fog of battle.Lincoln did have the authority to defend the Constituion ,but did it mean he would have to violate the rights of the states/people,both NORTH and SOUTH ?
     
  5. John S. Carter

    John S. Carter Cadet

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    9
     
  6. Jimklag

    Jimklag Private

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Chicago suburbs
    The courts were, in fact, pro-southern to the hilt and, with lifetime appointments, unlikely to change. Virtually every antebellum court decision, the most heinous of which was Dred Scott, favored the south. Southerners had for months been stealing arms from national arsenals and occupying federal property illegally. The arms and property in question were the property of all the United States. And no one in authority, north or south, did much to stop them. As far as feeling that they were going to lose their rights to an ever-growing north, this is a democratic republic with a two-party system and one or the other side attains control of the government periodically but fundamental changes require constitutional ammendments requiring super majorities in the congress and ratification by the states. The south merely found themselves in a position in which they were no longer calling the shots and they were pouting about it. They never had any intention of testing their arguments anew because the courts had already caved in completely and giving them all they wanted.
     
  7. cash

    cash Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    25,297
    Location:
    Right here.
    Madison was specific that he was not talking about a single state and that nothing in what he or Jefferson said would allow for secession. Also, the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions were never United States law. No other states agreed.
     
    jgoodguy likes this.
  8. Joshism

    Joshism Sergeant

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2012
    Messages:
    625
    Location:
    Jupiter, FL
    The VA and KY Resolutions were about nullifying a law (Alien & Sedition Acts) that was unconstitutional; it didn't violate a state's rights, it violated the rights of all American citizens.

    The Deep South seceded prior to Lincoln's inauguration; he had no power with which to commit unconstitutional acts and had been elected by a free and fair election. Therefore whatever precedent the VA & KY Resolutions set does not apply to them.

    The Upper South seceded after Fort Sumter so you could make an argument that they were seceding in response to Lincoln committing an allegedly unconstitutional act (mobilizing troops against the seceded Deep South states). However, the VA & KY Resolutions were about nullification not secession. If the Upper South states wished to invoke an alleged precedent of or principle embodied by of the VA & KY Resolutions the proper response was to simply refuse to answer Lincoln's call for volunteers. Instead, they seceded.

    [Edit to fix my accidental use of 'election' when I meant 'inauguration']
     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2017
    jgoodguy likes this.
  9. John S. Carter

    John S. Carter Cadet

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Is this not the way it is even today? The fear of the Federal counts that Jeffferson was concerned with has the authority to decide what the Constitution means ,even though they lack the knowledge of meaning which the signers meant.Lack of their orginal desires and the meaning of the words they used.The courts are and have been used by politcal parties at times to achieve their own goals, aka the selection of judges to fill key openings.Over a period of time judges have become tools to alter the meaning of the law.This is not just federal but also states. WAS THERE ANY CHALLENGES TO LINCOLN'S ACTIONS REGARDING HIS AUTHORIES DURING THE WAR? If one looks at the authority that a President has in any war in which this country has engaged in , Lincoln and his courts set the bar {ha}.
     
  10. Jimklag

    Jimklag Private

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Chicago suburbs
    Yes there was a challenge to Lincoln's actions by Chief Justice Taney. As Jackson did to John Marshall a few decafes before, Lincoln ignored him.
     
  11. cash

    cash Brev. Brig. Gen'l

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    25,297
    Location:
    Right here.
    Actually, Taney's opinion in Ex Parte Merryman really didn't amount to anything. There was no order as part of it. The popular view has been that Lincoln ignored Taney, but that has recently been shown to be a myth.

    https://studycivilwar.wordpress.com...ln-defy-a-court-order-by-chief-justice-taney/
     
    jgoodguy, leftyhunter and Jimklag like this.
  12. Jimklag

    Jimklag Private

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Chicago suburbs
    Seceded prior to the election? Did you mean prior to taking office?
     
  13. NedBaldwin

    NedBaldwin Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    Messages:
    6,933
    Location:
    California
    It is. I think this gets answered all the time.


    I see no reason to suppose that if one State violates the Constitution then it would be void on all the States; it has not been how our system has worked.

    Why did he call up so few troops when there was real reason?
     
  14. John S. Carter

    John S. Carter Cadet

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    To show that these continue threats to suceed were now being called,AKA GEORGE BUSH,AND ANDREW JACKON.The SOUTH had lost its power in the Congress and now with the threat of lossing their rights and being subjected to Northern aggresion,they now preceeded to follow through with their desire to form their own governmeant. NEITHER SIDE UNDERSTANDING THE FINAL RESULTS. The landing of the Pilgrams,as John Adams.stated,was the birth,then this was our adolesent period of maturing.Lincoln was a follower of the old Federal paty and Davis,was a studet,of his name sake,Jefferson.
     
  15. leftyhunter

    leftyhunter Captain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2011
    Messages:
    6,968
    Location:
    los angeles ca
    Was there a prominent antebellum politician named George Bush? What Southern rights was being threatened by the election of Lincoln? What Northern aggression are you referring to?
    Leftyhunter
     
    Bee likes this.
  16. amweiner

    amweiner Corporal

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    300
    Location:
    Monterey, CA
    John S. Carter, I encourage you to check out other threads that address the various Constitutional perspectives on secession. CWT has some incredibly intelligent people here who have done their research, and a few threads examine the transition between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution to shed light on its view of secession. Unfortunately my phone isn't cooperative and won't let me paste links, but please look around. There are well-reasoned arguments on all sides of the issue, and you may read some points you find valuable.
    Respectfully,
    Adam
     
  17. ivanj05

    ivanj05 First Sergeant

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2015
    Messages:
    1,021
    What power had the South lost that was Constitutionally guaranteed to it, and what rights of theirs had been threatened by anyone with the authority to carry those threats out?
     
  18. NedBaldwin

    NedBaldwin Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2011
    Messages:
    6,933
    Location:
    California
    I have no idea what you are trying to say here.

    Lincoln was a follower of the 3 strong presidents of the early US - Washington, Jefferson and Jackson; like all 3 of them, Lincoln used his power to enforce Federal authority over those who objected to it.
     
  19. jgoodguy

    jgoodguy Brigadier General Moderator Forum Host

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    21,521
    Location:
    Pelham, AL
    1. The South lost its power when Southern States seceded and their congress critters went South, not before then. They lost control, but not power in democratic elections.
    2. What Northern Aggression.
    3. The Lower South Seceded before Lincoln took office.
    4. What Rights were threatened.
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2017
  20. jgoodguy

    jgoodguy Brigadier General Moderator Forum Host

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    21,521
    Location:
    Pelham, AL
    Good point that the Upper South could have declared neutrality and left Lincoln mostly powerless. KY declared neutrality and the Confederates violated it.
     
  21. jgoodguy

    jgoodguy Brigadier General Moderator Forum Host

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    21,521
    Location:
    Pelham, AL
    Andersonh1 likes this.

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

Share This Page


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