Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: BroJoeK
While in Canada, Vallandigham met with Jacob Thompson, who was a representative of the confederate government. He talked to Thompson about plans for forming a Northwestern Confederacy, consisting of the states of Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois by overthrowing their governments. He requested money for weapons from the confederates. Vallandigham refused to handle the money himself and it was given to his associate James A. Barrett.

Ah, so you're for punishing Vallandigham in May 1863 for crimes he might commit in the future? What might you be guilty of in the future? Pay up now for that speeding ticket you will get in 2014. Ack! What might I be guilty of in the future?

If you will remember, I stated the following qualification in Post 193 (my bold below):

Did Vallandigham levy war against the United States? No, at least not at this time.

So anyone can reasonably argue that miscarriages of justice are always possible in our legal system, ...

Amen. Vallandigham was tried unconstitutionally by a military court in a state not in insurrection where the civil court system was functioning. Lincoln was guilty of that crime. As Governor Morton pointed out to Lincoln at the time, the trial was against the Habeas Corpus Act of 1863.

The record shows the court believed Vallandigham did express sympathy for the enemy and he was, per General Order #38, exiled for it.

Remember, this was a military court set up under the auspices of General Burnside who issued General Orders No. 38. Can you imagine one of the staff on the military court saying, "No, General, you're wrong." And the general responding with, "Off to the guard house with you, Major."

202 posted on 11/11/2012 9:39:57 AM PST by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]


To: rustbucket
rusty from post #177 arguing that Lincoln was guilty of a crime in trying former Congressman Vallandigham by military court: "I am also reminded of the ruling of the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1866). "

rusty: "Ah, so you're for punishing Vallandigham in May 1863 for crimes he might commit in the future? "

Ah, so you're for punishing Lincoln because of a Supreme Court decision delivered after Lincoln was dead, but you think Vallandigham's behavior after the summer of 1863 was irrelevant to his actions a few months earlier?

I'm only saying the court decided Vallandigham had violated a lawful order (#38), and his punishment was eventually changed, as specified in that order, to exile in the Confederacy.

Of course, Vallandigham was a highly visible political figure, equivalent in his day to, oh, say, a Senator John Kerry in ours.
The difference, if I dare say so, is that people in those days had less difficulty seeing the difference between friends and enemies.

203 posted on 11/11/2012 10:40:03 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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