Posted on 05/05/2005 9:59:22 AM PDT by cowboyway
SENECA — Dixie will take a holiday next Tuesday. It may seem odd to some local residents originally from Northern climes, but state and Oconee County offices will be closed come May 10. It will be Confederate Memorial Day. The day as a holiday has a history new as well as old. May 10 became an official state holiday in early May 2000, when then-Governor Jim Hodges signed a bill that both created Confederate Memorial Day as a state holiday and also mandated the birthday of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. as a state holiday. South Carolina thus became the last state to fully recognize the King holiday. State workers previously could choose to take the day off, or one of three Confederate-related holidays. Hodges, a Democrat, said at the time that the compromise was necessary for the bill to pass the Republican-controlled state House. On May 10, 2000, a few days after the new holiday became law, the decision was reached in the legislature to remove the Confederate battle flag from the state capitol dome to a Confederate memorial on the capitol grounds. In addition to Confederate Memorial Day being a state holiday, nine South Carolina counties observe it. It is observed, officially and unofficially, in the states that made up the Confederacy, as well as in Kentucky, which did not join the Confederacy but contributed a number of native sons to both sides of the Civil War. Most notably, both opposing presidents Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln. When it is observed depends on the state. Both the Carolinas observe it on May 10. Depending on the account, the date was chosen because it was the day Gen. Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson died in 1863 or the day Jefferson Davis was captured by Federal forces in 1865.
(Excerpt) Read more at emedia.techsolsc.com ...
War of Northern Aggression bump!
FIGHTING TERRORISM SINCE 1861
Who fired the first shot?
The North responded with an illegal and unconstitutional invasion of a sovereign country which posed no threat to the North.
"THE CONFEDERACY: FIGHTING TERRORISM SINCE 1861"
Beautiful!
It is irrelevant since the North manipulated the event. Remember: it was the North which refused to recognize the legal secession of the CSA. Even if that "shot" was a legitimate "act of war" (which is highly questionable), it doesn't justify the brutal actions & war of conquest on the hpart of the North.
Because it wasn't legal.
Even if that "shot" was a legitimate "act of war" (which is highly questionable), it doesn't justify the brutal actions & war of conquest on the hpart of the North.
How could it be a legitimate act of war when the confederate congress did not vote to approve war prior to that shot being fired?
Dream on!
Unlike the British Empire in 1776, the right of secession was recognized as a constitutional right in the United States after 1789. The charges of "treason and sedition" against the Confederate Battle Flag -- 1861 to 1865 -- are, therefore, false. The right of secession from the second republic established by the U.S. Constitution was explicitly asserted as a reserved right of the States by Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island in their respective ratifications of that document. The other States acknowledged secession as a constitutional right when they accepted without any qualifications the ratifications of Virginia, New York, and Rhode Island. The constitutional right of a State to secede from the Union was taught at the United States Military Academy at West Point. The books used were Views of the Constitution by William Rawle, an abolitionist, and a friend of Franklin and Washington, which expressly affirmed a State's right to secede and Commentaries on American Law by James Kent, which implicitly acknowledged the reserved rights of the States. Historically, the most zealous proponent of secession was Massachusetts. Massachusetts, and other New England States, threatened to secede from the United States in 1787, 1796, 1800, 1803, 1811, 1814, and 1845. Under Abraham Lincoln, it was "the Stars and Stripes", not the Confederate Battle Flag, that became the symbol of sedition in 1861. Lincoln overthrew the second republic of the United States established by the U.S. Constitution when he launched his war against the South. As the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the "Prize Cases, December 1862: "[Congress] cannot declare war against a State or any number of States by virtue of any clause in the Constitution... [The President] has no power to initiate or declare war against a foreign nation or a domestic State… Several of these States have combined to form a new Confederacy, claiming to be acknowledged by the world as a Sovereign State … Their right to do so is now being decided by wager of Battle."
There was no legal right under British law for a colony to secede from the British Empire. The actions of the American Revolutionaries -- from the Boston Tea Party, to publishing pamphlets calling for independence, to convening the Continental Congress, to taking up arms at Lexington and Concord -- were treasonous and seditious.
The CSA did in fact legally secede from the Union. The problem was that the North refused to recognize it due to the fact that they were going to lose all that revenue from those high tariffs they had been collecting.
References please. Or is the above statement just a parroting of your yankee, liberal propaganda education.
When the Southern states seceded, there were neither words in the US constitution forbidding or permitting secession.
Read The South Was Right by Kennedy & Kennedy.
Not it was not. The Supreme Court ruled so in 1869.
Legal Secession Conventions were conducted in accordance with the Constitution.
The Constitution is silent on the method of secession, so stating that secession conventions were conducted in accordance with the Constitution would be incorrect.
Several of these States have combined to form a new Confederacy, claiming to be acknowledged by the world as a Sovereign State … Their right to do so is now being decided by wager of Battle."
Please continue with the quote. The Court went on to say:
"The ports and territory of each of these States are held in hostility to the General Government. It is no loose, unorganized insurrection, having no defined boundary or possession. It has a boundary marked by lines of bayonets, and which can be crossed only by force—south of this line is enemies’ territory, because it is claimed and held in possession by an organized, hostile and belligerent power.
All persons residing within this territory whose property may be used to increase the revenues ofthe hostile power are, in this contest, liable to be treated as enemies, though not foreigners. They have cast off their allegiance and made war on their Government, and are nonetheless enemies because they are traitors."
The Court is recognizing the southern acts for what they were, a rebellion of the states against their government.
The CSA did in fact legally secede from the Union. The problem was that the North refused to recognize it due to the fact that they were going to lose all that revenue from those high tariffs they had been collecting.
Losing the small percentage of the tariff generated by the southern states would have hurt, but not significantly. That was hardly a reason for war.
As opposed to your southron myth-machine? The Supreme Court ruled that unilateral secession as practiced by the southern states was unconstitutional. The decision was Texas v White (74 US 700) issued in 1869.
When the Southern states seceded, there were neither words in the US constitution forbidding or permitting secession.
True. Secession may be described as an implied power. But there are many implied powers, and one of them is the power granted Congress to approve the change in the status of a state. That would include leaving.
Read The South Was Right by Kennedy & Kennedy.
I've read several books by the Kennedy brothers. I've never been impressed.
Nobody had declared war when Pearl Harbor was bombed, yet I doubt anyone would have disputed that it was indeed an act of war.
The other point I was making was that this first "shot" did not justify the deaths of 600 000 people / the destruction of Dixie homes nor the subjugation of the Southron people & the reversal of their independence.
The south fired on the U.S. garrison in Sumter, and continued firing until they were forced to surrender. What about that did not justify the Union response?
When the North declared independence from Britain (with significant help form the South) it was celebrated as freedom. When the CSA did essentially the SAME THING -as a continuation of the secessionist revolution started in 1776
When the founding father's declared their independence in 1776 one thing that they knew for sure was that they would have to fight for it. Since, by your own admission, the confederate actions were viturally the same thing, then the fact that their actions were opposed should be no cause for complaint on your part. The major difference being, of course, that the confederacy lost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.