Posted on 01/20/2014 1:42:16 PM PST by mhutcheson
Sons of Confederate Veterans, Camp Grimes Co. Greys. Texas
Oh, sorry. Did I use “sarcasm”wrong?
Very good article thanks for posting.
On April 27, 1861, President Lincoln, fearful that Southern troops might overtake the capital, suspended the writ of habeas corpus and declared martial law in Maryland. Shortly afterward, Union soldiers captured John Merryman, a cavalryman who had burned bridges and destroyed telegraph lines. Merryman challenged his military detention. On May 26, 1861, Chief Justice Roger Taney, sitting circuit, ruled that Lincoln had acted unconstitutionally — only Congress could suspend the Great Writ. Lincoln ignored the order and continued to seize and hold adversaries without a hearing. He did likewise in other states, such as Missouri. However, once order had been established in a county, Lincoln was inclined to release most of the prisoners on the condition that they pledge loyalty to the Union. The New York Tribune, a newspaper hostile to Lincoln, rejoiced: “the reign of lawless despotism has ended.” Of course, the practice of suspending the writ occurred again in 1862 and 1863. Insofar as all constitutional rights were suspended in such instances, all First Amendment rights were likewise suspended.
“FREE MOJO!!!!!!!”
???
Abe Lincoln -- Racist and Hypocrite i.e. Typical 19th century politician.
He was against freeing the slaves before he was for it.
Abe Lincoln - The "Great Emancipator" LOL
Major-General John A. Drx,
Commanding at New York:
Whereas there has been wickedly and traitorously printed and published this morning in the New York World and New York Journal of Commerce, newspapers printed and published in the city of New York, a false and spurious proclamation purporting to be signed by the President and to be countersigned by the Secretary of State, which publication is of a treasonable nature, designed to give aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States and to the rebels now at war against the Government and their aiders and abettors, you are therefore hereby commanded forthwith to arrest and imprison in any fort or military prison in your command the editors, proprietors, and publishers of the aforesaid newspapers, and all such persons as, after public notice has been given of the falsehood of said publication, print and publish the same with intent to give aid and comfort to the enemy; and you will hold the persons so arrested in close custody until they can be brought to trial before a military commission for their offense. You will also take possession by military force of the printing establishments of the New York World and Journal of Commerce, and hold the same until further orders, and prohibit any further publication therefrom.
A. LINCOLN.
“If it was going to be a goner in the South why did the South hold on to segregation?”
Ask the North that question, too.
“Jim Crow laws were uniquely southern. The north did have black codes that bore some similarity.”
“similarity”? weasel words form a weasel. I guess the black riots in New York City at the time were just “similarities” to something else.
The differences between the Black Codes (1800-1866) - which by the way were a part of life both north and south - were 1. method of inception, 2. degree of severity, and 3. degree of participation.
The Black Codes were ways that whites dealt with blacks. They weren't pretty and they weren't fair but they weren't generally cruel. As I said, they were incorporated in communities both north and south - but far more pervasive in the south.
Jim Crow laws came as a result or a reaction to the imposition of reconstruction. One of the very first things southerners did when they regained control of their state legislatures was to pass laws severely restricting the civil rights of blacks. They were exclusive to the south. They were universally applied throughout the south. They affected virtually every part of life. Some of the Jim Crow laws that differed from Black Code laws included:
Try reading the Constitution before trying to make it suit your misperception. The States and the People had and have the right to un-join the USA when the government so grossly violates the Constitution.
Maybe they do and maybe they don’t but they certainly didn’t the way the slavocracy did it.
Really? The only person I see offended is you.There’s more than enough people on these Civil War threads who fit that description.
Reading your other post 232 gives question to your playing loose with facts or do you seriously think when Jim VCrow laws were passed there were movie theaters, busses or phone booths?
Reconstruction and putting ex-slaves in positions of authority not only caused great stress, but significant wreckage of State and local government. The ex-slaves and yankee carpetbaggers brought on the KKK, not the poor Southerners who were simply interested in surviving the after war punishment at the hands of the Union.
The ex-slaves and yankee carpetbaggers brought on the KKK, not the poor Southerners who were simply interested in surviving the after war punishment at the hands of the Union.
Baloney. Y'all brought it on yourselves.
What a juvenile deflection.
Do you honestly believe that all of the Southern Freepers here are perfectly cool with you calling them, "Dixiecrats in sheep's clothing"?
It's a despicable insult. You ought to man up and take it back.
Lincoln is my 7th cousin. You are right, it was something my great-great grandma talked about when telling me about my family history on her branch.
Debbi
BFL
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.