Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: cowboyway
"The War Department presented its evidence for a treason trial against Davis to a famed jurist, Francis Lieber, for his analysis. Lieber pronounced 'Davis will not be found guilty and we shall stand there completely beaten'."---Frank Conner, The South Under Siege 1830-2000

Whoop-de-do. The whole question of the legality of the confederate secession did go to trial, and the court ruled that the acts were illegal. To quote from the decision:

"When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.

Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union."

A little-known fact of the Constitution is that two of the largest states -- Virginia and New York -- made the right to withdraw from the union explicit in their acceptance of the Constitution.

Absolutely meaningless. Both states in question also ratified the Constitution as passed out of covention, and could have included any clause they wanted in their ratification document. And if that clause violated the Constitution it was invalid.

"[T]he several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States, and of certain amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for general purposes, delegated to that government certain powers, reserving, each state to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void and of no effect."----Thomas Jefferson

"It crushes "nullification" and must hasten the abandonment of "Secession." But this dodges the blow by confounding the claim to secede at will, with the right of seceding from intolerable oppression. The former answers itself, being a violation, without cause, of a faith solemnly pledged. The latter is another name only for revolution, about which there is no theoretic controversy." -- James Madison

There are many problems with his argument.

Not really, no.

90 posted on 03/30/2008 1:56:13 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
Whoop-de-do.

What a counter! I'm speechless................

Not really, no.

Yeah, really.

97 posted on 03/31/2008 9:22:55 AM PDT by cowboyway (Did I say that out loud?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson