Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: WhiskeyPapa
President Lincoln clearly had the power to issue the EP.

Ya think? The US Supreme Court disagreed.

There are, without doubt, occasions in which private property may lawfully be taken possession of or destroyed to prevent it from falling into the hands of the public enemy; and also where a military officer, charged with a particular duty, may impress private property into the public service or take it for public use. Unquestionably, in such cases, the government is bound to make full compensation to the owner.

... Our duty is to determine under what circumstances private property may be taken from the owner by a military officer in a time of war. And the question here is, whether the law permits it to be taken to insure the success of any enterprise against a public enemy which the commanding officer may deem it advisable to undertake. And we think it very clear that the law does not permit it.
Chief Justice Taney, Mitchell v. Harmony, 54 U.S. 115 (1851)

Your heroes all thought of the slaves as property -- not human at all, right?
Your despatch (sic), asking in substance, whether, in case Missouri shall adopt gradual emancipation, the general government will protect slave owners in that species of property during the short time it shall be permitted by the State to exist within it, has been received.
Abraham Lincoln, 'To John M. Schofield', 22 Jun 1863, Collected Works Of Lincoln, Roy P. Basler, ed, Vol 6, p. 291
Not my hero.
307 posted on 08/19/2003 12:49:26 PM PDT by 4CJ (Come along chihuahua, I want to hear you say yo quiero taco bell. - Nolu Chan, 28 Jul 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies ]


To: 4ConservativeJustices
Ya think? The US Supreme Court disagreed.

There are, without doubt, occasions in which private property may lawfully be taken possession of or destroyed to prevent it from falling into the hands of the public enemy; and also where a military officer, charged with a particular duty, may impress private property into the public service or take it for public use. Unquestionably, in such cases, the government is bound to make full compensation to the owner.

You make excuses for slavery.

Some people in the ACW era thought slavery was a monstrous evil, but you don't seem to think so.

Walt

316 posted on 08/20/2003 3:52:53 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies ]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
Ya think? The US Supreme Court disagreed.

There are, without doubt, occasions in which private property may lawfully be taken possession of or destroyed to prevent it from falling into the hands of the public enemy; and also where a military officer, charged with a particular duty, may impress private property into the public service or take it for public use. Unquestionably, in such cases, the government is bound to make full compensation to the owner.

When did the Supreme Court -explicitly- disavow, or even speak to, the Emancipation Proclamation?

Walt

329 posted on 08/20/2003 2:08:57 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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