Lost causers always like to claim Lincoln was a tyrant. Congress had recessed prior to the firing on Fort Sumter. Lincoln called Congress into an extraordinary session and they met on July 4th, 1861. Hardly the actions of a tyrant. If he was the tyrant they claim he would not have called this session nor even let them assemble.
The 37th Congress, with both houses now controlled by Republicans due to the seceding states representatives leaving, then approved all actions President Lincoln had taken up to that time as necessary to preserve the Union. They then began passing laws to help win the war. One of these being the confiscation act of July 1862.
Congress also exercised its constitutional duties of overseeing the process of the war. Many of these committees were very acrimonious to Lincoln and defeats of the Union army on the battlefield. The congressional record shows that even democratic copperheads were given their turn to talk.
Lincoln was far from a tyrant. He, and the 37th congress, were exercising their constitutional powers to suppress the largest insurrection in the countries history.
I wonder what the Maryland Legislature would have thought about that.
>>OIFVeteran wrote: “Lost causers always like to claim Lincoln was a tyrant.”
I am not a lost-causer, but Lincoln WAS a tyrant.
*****************
>>OIFVeteran wrote: “Congress had recessed prior to the firing on Fort Sumter. Lincoln called Congress into an extraordinary session and they met on July 4th, 1861. Hardly the actions of a tyrant. If he was the tyrant they claim he would not have called this session nor even let them assemble.”
Perhaps you misunderstand the definition of tyranny. A common definition is the usurpation of power, which Lincoln exercised over and over again.
*****************
>>OIFVeteran wrote: “The 37th Congress, with both houses now controlled by Republicans due to the seceding states representatives leaving, then approved all actions President Lincoln had taken up to that time as necessary to preserve the Union. They then began passing laws to help win the war. One of these being the confiscation act of July 1862.”
No doubt the republican-controlled congress rubber-stamped Lincoln’s usurpations.
*****************
>>OIFVeteran wrote: “Congress also exercised its constitutional duties of overseeing the process of the war. Many of these committees were very acrimonious to Lincoln and defeats of the Union army on the battlefield. The congressional record shows that even democratic copperheads were given their turn to talk.”
I have read that Lincoln micro-managed the war. Check out: James M. McPherson, “Tried by War: Abraham Lincoln as Commander in Chief.” Oxford University Press, 2008
*****************
>>OIFVeteran wrote: “Lincoln was far from a tyrant. He, and the 37th congress, were exercising their constitutional powers to suppress the largest insurrection in the countries history.”
The only insurrection in those days was by Lincoln and his merry band of thugs against Union citizenry.
When are you going to support and defend the Constitution, rather than usurpations against it? Just curious . . .
Mr. Kalamata
Anyone can call anyone a "tyrant", the word is meaningless by itself.
So the apt comparison in this case is Lincoln to Jefferson Davis -- did Lincoln the "tyrant" take any actions which Davis the... uh, "patriot" didn't also take?
Answer: other than winning the war, none I can think of.