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

To: 4ConservativeJustices
You calling Grier a liar?

"The parties belligerent in a public war are independent nations. But it is not necessary, to constitute war, that both parties should be acknowledged as independent nations or sovereign States. A war may exist where one of the belligerents claims sovereign rights as against the other."

--Justice Grier, Majority Opinion in the Prize Cases

You're the liar. Grier did not say that the USA and the so-called CSA were both independent nations.

Walt

1,048 posted on 02/03/2004 8:33:16 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1047 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
You're the liar. Grier did not say that the USA and the so-called CSA were both independent nations.

I wonder if you really are to dumb to understand this, or if you're just pretending.

The US Supreme Court, in an earlier Supreme court case, The Santissima Trinidad, 7 Wheat. 283 (1822) the court held that with the US declaration of neutrality 'each party is therefore deemed by us a belligerent nation.'

Got that? 'The condition of neutrality cannot exist unless there be two belligerent parties.' A declaration of neutrality issued by a country - including the US - recognizes two parties. In the above case, the US recognized the parties involved as nations, even though it was considered a civil war.

Grier writes, 'the parties to a civil war usually concede to each other belligerent rights. They exchange prisoners, and adopt the other courtesies and rules common to public or national wars.' Which did occur. That is beyond dispute.

Next Grier writes, '[b]y the Constitution, Congress alone has the power to declare a national or foreign war', which did occur, 'when in 1861, we find Congress "ex majore cautela" and in anticipation of such astute objections, passing an act approving, legalizing, and making valid all the acts, proclamations, and orders of the President, &c., as if they had been issued and done under the previous express authority and direction of the Congress of the United States.' The blockade proclaimed by the President is an act of war under international law. The power institute a blockade is congressional ('To declare War ... make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water' and 'regulate Commerce with foreign Nations').

Next, Grier states, that '[w]e have shown that a civil war such as that now waged between the Northern and Southern States is properly conducted according to the humane regulations of public law [international] as regards capture on the ocean.' The independent status of the belligerents as nations was recognized by Grier's statement, the 'parties belligerent in a public war are independent nations.'

It's not rocket science.

1,049 posted on 02/04/2004 6:35:52 AM PST by 4CJ (||) Support free speech and stop CFR - visit www.ArmorforCongress.com (||)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1048 | 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