Was secession "legal"?

[williamlayton]

MAY I ADD A PS.
I agree with you, however, a disclaimer is necessary.
Every position has a smattering of truth and logic--well except for--heck I aint goin there cause I am not capable of sayin it without startin a flame, even though I would only be pokin fun.
Anywho-there is always an undercurrent of greed taken by individuals no matter the magnanimity of the thought originally proposed.
Blessings

[pastorp]

Williamlayton, What makes you think we lost. Were just changing tatics. Save your confederate money boys, the south will rise again were the bywords I grew up with. Regards, Byron

[williamlayton]

HEHEHE! YUP.
Blessings

[Sundown Holly]

Was it legal? In 1868 Jefferson Davis was out on bail awaiting trial for treason. The "Radical Republicans" as they were known were anxious to try him.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court approached the Attorney General of the United States and warned him against trying Davis for treason.  His reasoning was that Davis would bring up the subject of succession and that there was a very good chance the Supreme Court would rule it was legal. If this happened then this justice said that would have made the North's invasion of the South an illegal act.  The Republicans tried a different approach but in the end dropped the whole idea and Davis was never tried. Was it legal? The then sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court felt there was a very good chance it was.

[lgm270]

Jefferson Davis' two volume  memiors entitled "The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government" make a very good case for the legality/constitutionality of secession.  Highly technical and legalistic, nevertheless Jefferson Davis supports his position with many citations from the historical record.  A highly recommended book for the insight it gives and for the many sources to which it refers.

[Raimford]

To Ironfoot and El Confederado

Allow me to put my 2 cents worth, OK due to inflation, 50 cents worth into your discussion.

When the Constitution of the United States was put forth before the people of the 13 original Nations for ratification it was a year or so before the required 9 States ratified it into international law.  It was several years before the other 4 States ratified it.  Until those last States ratified the Constitution they were not a party to it and could not and did not share in its provisions.  Today, if a State wishes to secede from the Union it must follow the required steps.  1.  Petition Congress.  2. Get all the States to ratify the succession.  That's the only way that I know of.  I briefly reviewed your discussions above and if I missed either of you saying this, well shut my mouth.



"All who have meditated on the art of governing mankind are convinced the fate of empires depends on the education of youth"  Aristotle

[nohorse]

Was it legal? In 1868 Jefferson Davis was out on bail awaiting trial for treason. The "Radical Republicans" as they were known were anxious to try him.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court approached the Attorney General of the United States and warned him against trying Davis for treason.  His reasoning was that Davis would bring up the subject of succession and that there was a very good chance the Supreme Court would rule it was legal. If this happened then this justice said that would have made the North's invasion of the South an illegal act.  The Republicans tried a different approach but in the end dropped the whole idea and Davis was never tried. Was it legal? The then sitting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court felt there was a very good chance it was.

Excellent point...Thanks

[missouri dave]

You might want to check out the books "The South was Right" and it's sequel "Why Not Freedom".

[nohorse]

I've read  'em. Also know the Kennedy brothers who wrote 'em.  Interesting reading......

[ironfoot]

http://www.mindspring.com/~dennisw/articles/kennedy/


"...the Confederacy seceded and fought a war because the North intended to apply to the blacks the tenets of the Declaration of Independence pertaining to all men being equal and in possession of certain rights, the "self-evident" phrase. You won't find this mentioned in The South Was Right despite the overwhelming body of evidence that substantiates it."

[Bush Master]

I am amazed that there are people still out there that believe the South fought the war over slavery. This myth has been exposed for decades. Once again, the war was fought over taxation and States rights, not slavery.

Lincoln was a mechantilist who believed in a strong centralized government and a national bank, both of which we have now. The mass of laws, rules and regulations that exist today make it impossible for a normal, law-abiding citizen to live his or her life without unknowingly breaking them. We have Lincoln and his war of northern aggression to thank for this as he laid the foundation for Roosevelt I, Wilson and Roosevelt II to build upon. The succeeding presidents since Roosevelt II have capitalized on this and this is how we find ourselves in the predicament we are in today.

[ironfoot]

It was over slavery. Southern apologists have been trying to rewrite history ever since the south lost. It was when Lincoln was elected on an antislavery platform that the south seceded. No other issue was important enough to cause secession.

[Bush Master]

Sorry, ironfoot, but you have it backwards. Nothern apologists have been trying to promote a legitimate reason for Lincoln murdering 600,000 of his own people and the cause of slavery works very well. Of course it was about taxation and States rights, slavery was losing favor rapidly and would have been eliminated before the turn of the century. Not to mention the fact that slaves were very expensive and less than 5% of southerners owned any. Slavery was losing favor and becoming economically unviable, the institution was doomed.

I was brought up in Illinois and had been fed this tripe my whole life. I didn't discover the truth until many years later after reading many, many articles and books on the subject.

[ironfoot]

Read the Southern states reasons for secession. It was to preserve slavery. The South has denied it ever since.

http://www.washtimes.com/civilwar/20030822-085758-4689r.htm

http://www.swcivilwar.com/cw_causes.html

[Bush Master]

Again, Ironfoot, like a liberal / statist who believes the Constitution and Bill of Rights are a menu to pick and choose from, you and the so-called historians you hand pick to back you up select only the words from the Declaration of Secession document that suit your revisionist history. I did a simple google search and found the entire document here:

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/secession.htm

Yes, slavery was an issue at the time. No, it was no the most important issue, if you read the ENTIRE document. The compelling reasons clearly stated are the usurpation of state sovereignty and taxation. Now that more people are realizing Lincoln was a tyrant, his sympathizers are scrambling to come to his aid. Sorry, nice try but you will have to do better than that. Why don't you read DiLorenzo instead of Jaffe? At least Thomas will give you the whole story and not just the parts that fit his agenda.

[wrightbrigade]

Unbelievable arguments here.  I have enjoyed the reading but I'm sad that people think the Civil War was over slavery.  My ancestors that fought in the Civil War would never have given one red once of blood over a slave.  They did not own slaves or know of anyone who did personally.  But when there land was invaded and heritage trampled on  they fought as hard as there fathers had done in the Rev. War.  We did not come here to be micro managed by big government.  It was to be independent.  NEWSFLASH.  But unfortunately the big money and government got there way and now we are all slaves.  PEACE

[missouri dave]

The civil war (and it's aftermath the reconstruction) firmly established the intentions and ability of the government to enforce it's will on an unwilling populace thereby negating the government OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, and FOR THE PEOPLE! Freedom died at appomatox!

[Bush Master]

Spot on, Wrightbrigade & Missouri Dave! I think Ironfoot needs to disconnect himself from the brainwashing machine he seems to be dependent on and learn to think for himself. Lincoln was a tyrant and a mass murderer and it is he we have to thank for the mess we find ourselves in today.

[ironfoot]

It was when Lincoln was elected on an anti-slavery platform (see Coopers Union and House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand speeches) the core southern slave states seceded.

Maybe your relatives motives were different, but the purpose of secession was preservation and expansion of slavery.

Lincoln said the war was about slavery in his State of the Union addresses.


Booth shot Lincoln after hearing Lincoln give a speech stating that some blacks who served in the Union army should be given the right to vote.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USACWbooth.htm

[Bush Master]

Lincoln was NOT elected on an anti-slavery platform, do you make this stuff up? The purpose of secession was the preservation and expansion of slavery? Unbelieveable! It seems that you are not about to let facts get in the way of your opinion.

Again, slavery was on the way out. Slaves were very, very expensive to buy and costly to maintain. Very few southerners owned slaves for those reasons. Add to that the advances being made in technology and there was literally no need for slaves any longer. Lincoln couldn't have cared less about the plight of the slaves, he was all about usurping power and consolidating it in Washington DC. I notice you like to ignore other quotes from this tyrant that go against your worship of him:

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything."
-- September 18, 1858 - Fourth Debate with Stephen A. Douglas at Charleston, Illinois

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause."
-- August 22, 1862 - Letter to Horace Greeley

Not the paragon of racial harmony you make him out to be, is he? These two quotes do more to illustrate Lincoln was a proponent of a strong central government at the expense of the States and the people than your ramblings. Lincoln also believed that the union pre-dated the Constitution's ratification. If that doesn't compute, try asking yourself were you married before you met your wife? Were you a parent before your children were born? Abe Lincoln, a delusional tyrant that would have been more at home in the mental hospital than the whitehouse.

[ironfoot]

Bush Master

I do not recall making personal attacks about you.
Here is a link to the Republican platform Lincoln was elected on:

http://alpha.furman.edu/~benson/docs/repplat6.htm

I did not make it up.

Here is a quote from that platform:

" That the new dogma, that the Constitution, of its own force, carries Slavery into any or all of the Territories of the United States, is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit provisions of that instrument itself, with contemporaneous exposition, and with legislative and judicial precedent; is revolutionary in its tendency, and subversive of the peace and harmony of the country."



The first state to secede was South Carolina.
Here is a link to their declaration of causes for secession:

http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/reasons.html#SouthCarolina

Here is a quote from that declaration:

"We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery...."

The south seceded because Lincoln said slavery was wrong.

One of the times Lincoln said it was wrong, was in his Coopers Union Speech.
Here is a link to that speech:

http://www.thelincolnmuseum.org/new/research/cooper.html

Here is a quote from the speech:

"Wrong as we think slavery is, we can yet afford to let it alone where it is, because that much is due to the necessity arising from its actual presence in the nation; but can we, while our votes will prevent it, allow it to spread into the National Territories, and to overrun us here in these Free States? If our sense of duty forbids this, then let us stand by our duty, fearlessly and effectively."

Please read the speech.
Then read it again a couple more times.
Then you may understand cause of the Civil War.

[lakota]

I somehow doubt that my ancestors, who were dirt poor farmers, walked from what is now Parkersburg West Virginia all the way to Richmond to put their lives on the line to protect the institution of slavery, even as the eighty-some counties that comprise West Virginia broke from Virginia to side with the Union.

I also read a direct quote from a Confederate General-"If I thought this war were over slavery, I would lay my sword down right now." I cant remember who was quoted as saying this, but I remember how it struck me when I read it. I too, had been brain-washed by the public school system into believing the War was over slavery, years after graduating, I am beginning to learn on my own that this is certainly not the case. Obviously there were other things at stake.

Scott.

[missouri dave]

If the war were fought over slavery then the emancipation proclamation should have freed ALL the slaves. It didn't. It only freed the slaves in the states in seccession. I hold to my original opinion, freedom died at appomattox.

[Bush Master]

Ironfoot, first of all let me apologize, I didn't intend to attack you personally, only your position.

You read the documents, but you only seem to glean what information suits your cause. If you read and comprehend the secession declarations in their entirety, you would understand that it was about the overbearing fedgov. The south would never go to war over the issue of slavery, period. First of all, it only effected a very small percentage of the population. Second it was dying, the institution of slavery would have been over and done with before the turn of the century, war or no war and nothing could have changed that outcome. I would even venture a guess that had the south won and become an independent country, slavery would have still be gone before the calendar turned to 1900.

It was about State's Rights and the usurpation of power by the fedgov, something that had been brewing since at least 1821, if not earlier. Almost from the day of ratification, the fedgov started grabbing powers clearly not delegated to it by the Constitution. Lincoln invaded to seal the power of the centralized fedgov, something he fanatically believed in and wanted to create.

You ignore the parts of the declarations you don't like, you ignore the racist quotes directly from Lincoln's mouth and you ignore decades of research. Face the facts, Lincoln was a power mad megalomaniac who invaded the south to create the all powerful fedgov we have today.

[Bush Master]

Re-reading your posts, I discover that your quote from the declaration of secession of South Carolina proves my point exactly, thank - you.

I agree, Missouri Dave, freedom died at Appomattox.

[ironfoot]

Consider the timing of secession.
It was when Lincoln was elected, and before he had the opportunity to sign any laws as President.
Lincoln's predecessor was pro-slavery, so no secession.
Lincoln was anti-slavery, so the south seceded.

The Emancipation Proclamation is another issue.
In brief:
1. Lincoln was anti-slavery.
2. Lincoln knew slavery was authorized by the Constitution, and he could not unilaterally end it.
3. Lincoln told the south that, hoping to head off secession.
4. After the war started, Lincoln could enact the Emancipation Proclamation, because you can deprive the enemy of property in war time.

It is ironic that the south seceded because anti-slavery Lincoln was elected President, and that  140 years later some attack Lincoln because the Emancipation Proclamation did not go far enough.

The truth is that Lincoln was against slavery, but more concerned about preserving the Union then ending slavery. But he wanted to do both.

I suppose 100 years from now people may complain that George W. Bush was not anti-abortion enough, because if he was anti-abortion enough he would not have allowed abortions to take place while he was President.

[ironfoot]

A lot of staements were made in various posts above. Most did not have any historical referneces to back them up. There are too many staements for me to take the time to respond to, but I will take a stab at a couple:

Statement: "Again, slavery was on the way out. Slaves were very, very expensive to buy and costly to maintain. Very few southerners owned slaves for those reasons. Add to that the advances being made in technology and there was literally no need for slaves any longer."

Response: The declarations state that anti-slavery actions of the north was reason to secede. Here is a quote from the South Carolina declaration:


"A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."

More Response: If slavery was on the way out, somebody should have told South Carolina. Actually somebody did tell South Carolina, the Republican Party. South Carolina took offense, and seceded in an effort to preserve slavery.


Statement: "Lincoln couldn't have cared less about the plight of the slaves, he was all about usurping power and consolidating it in Washington DC."

Response: What actions of Lincoln, that he took before secession and the start of the war, back up those assertions?

[ironfoot]

Re-reading your posts, I discover that your quote from the declaration of secession of South Carolina proves my point exactly, thank - you.

Please explain.
When I read the declaration, it is clear to me that South Carolina is seceding because Lincoln was elected on the Republican Party anti-slavery platform.

[ironfoot]

I hold to my original opinion, freedom died at appomattox.[/quote]

You mean the freedom to own other people as property?

[Bush Master]

Ironfoot, there is no point in continuing this discussion. You take quotes from the declarations out of context and think it proves your point; it doesn't. Despite the quotes that prove Lincoln was the worst sort of racist and started the war to "save the union", not free the slaves, despite all of the evidence to the contrary, you still cling steadfastly to your beliefs. Slavery was on the way out, you obviously haven't taken the time to learn about life on a plantation and the costs involved in buying and keeping slaves. Would it surprise you to learn that a healthy male slave cost over $2000.00? 2000 1860 dollars are the equivalent of over $40,000.00 today. How many people in the south do you actually think could afford that? Most people today cannot afford a $40,000.00 car, and we have very creative financing available to us that was completely unheard of in the 1800s. Given the cost to purchase, what do you think it cost to feed, clothe and house slaves? Have you forgotten that this was the dawn of the industrial revolution? Slavery was becoming obsolete, even if the cost of owning slaves wasn't prohibitive, the fact that machines could do more in a hour for much less money than a slave could in a week spelled the end of slavery. Do you really believe that the 95+% of people in the south who couldn't afford slaves were going to drop everything to defend the few slave owners? It defies all logic and the historical record! So, believe what you what to believe, think what you want to think, obviously nothing I or anybody else can say will change your mind. You are entitled to your opinion, right or wrong.