Posted on 08/20/2004 5:43:21 AM PDT by TexConfederate1861
see 1434.
see 1434.
free dixie,sw
ROTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What part of "The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war" is beyon your understanding?
The later Dow case, should correct your misunderstanding.
Ya think? ;o) In Dow, "said force had plundered the dwelling-house of the plantation and carried off a silver pitcher, half a dozen silver knives, and other table were, the private property of the plaintiff, the whole property taken amounting in value to $1,611.29; that these acts of Captain Snell and of the officers and soldiers under his command, which the petition characterized as 'illegal, wanton, oppressive, and unjustifiable,' were perpetrated under a verbal and secret order of Brigadier-General Neal Dow, then in the service of the United States."
"We fully agree with the presiding justice of the Circuit Court in the doctrine that the military should always be kept in subjection to the laws of the country to which it belongs, and that he is no friend to the Republic who advocates the contrary. The established principle of every free people is, that the law shall alone govern; and to it the military must always yield. We do not controvert the doctrine of Mitchell v. Harmony, reported in the 13th of Howard; on the contrary, we approve it."
Justice Field, Dow v. Johnson, 100 U.S. 158, 169, (1880*)
* The case was argued during the October term, the opinion was delivered 2 Feb 1880.
Good catch.. CR has a habit of citing other than the justices opinion as fact.
Nailed it ;o)
I think they also burned a convent IIRC.
to a Christian,the act of pulling down a statue of Mary & spitting upon her is WORSE than the robbery. (NOTE to readers: i am NOT a Roman Catholic, rather a poor quality Southern Baptist.)
no matter how much the damnyankee loonies on the forum may wish that the union army acted like choirboys in the prostrated southland, NOTHING no matter how indecent/immoral/criminal was BENEATH the dignity of that horde of criminals.
to quote a professor at Radcliffe College, "the union army raged throughout the south like a herd of rabid swine, thoughtlessly raping,robbing,looting & burning the privaste property of the civilian populus without either mercy or honor. the fiends preyed on the poor & defenseless civilians, in a manner LESS acceptable than the worst depredations of the Goths & Huns".
the COMMISSION of ATROCITIES WAS INTENTIONAL & a PREMEDITATED PORTION OF THE damnyankee regime's overall WAR PLAN.
free dixie,sw
free the southland,sw
inquiring minds want to know.
free dixie,sw
Sounds like something the Klan would do. Could very well have been Nathan Bedford Forrest and his lunatic fringe having a good old time dressed as "bluebellies."
BS. The klan wasn't even around in 1863. An the Official Records have several accounts of preachers/priests arrested for failure to pray for King Lincoln.
On February 17, 1865, the Iowa and Illinois soldiers of Logan's XV Corps entered Columbia, South Carolina, singing, "Hail Columbia, happy land - If I don't burn you, I'll be damned." A fire did break out, and aided by a favorable wind, it swept over the unfortunate town. Some of the Union troops quartered in the city attempted to put the fire out; others were seen setting fire to different spots that were untouched by the flames. Generals Logan and Howard diligently labored to put out the flames, and Irish soldiers from Illinois regiments worked hard to save the convent in town. Contrary to his actions the night before, Logan cursed over being denied the privilege of burning the same convent the next morning.
Interesting, in light of the account from William Simms quoted on lewrockwell. He indicates the convent was burned (possible there was more than one in Columbia?) and:
"One of these mournful processions of fugitives was that of the sisterhood of the Ursuline Convent, the nuns and their pupils. Beguiled to the last moment by the promises and assurances of officers and others in Sherman’s army, the Mother Superior had clung to her house to the last possible moment."
Hmmmm... what to make of it?
Midnight came and a brigade of Union troops south of the city was finally sent into the streets to arrest disorderly soldiers and citizens. About 2500 men were arrested “including officers of nearly every grade…”110 Because he did not have a pass, even Captain Byers, who had been helping a family escape the fire, was taken into custody.111 Other soldiers, like Private Abruckle who was aiding citizens in the streets reach safety, were allowed to remain in the city to help.112Yet, the pillaging and burning continued by men “ruder and fiercer.”113
The guards assigned to the Ursuline Convent began their own rampage of the building forcing the remaining nuns to leave. “Fire was falling so thick that it burned the veils and dresses of the nuns on their way to join their sisters in the graveyard” of the church nearby.114
“About two o’clock in the morning, the house behind ours, and the one across the street, burnt down, and ours seemed in such danger that we took the four little children, whom we had kept in bed, and my mother took them across the street into the academy square, where many burnt-out people had taken refuge.”—Harriott H. Ravenel115
About 3 a.m., the cross above the Convent fell116 and an hour later the winds subsided.117 Then with the light, reveille sounded and the soldiers remaining in the city immediately returned to their ranks.118
Sounds there like the convent was torched? Wonder if there are any freepers from Columbia who could answer.
If so, the destruction was far more organized than what I had thought (i.e. these were not in any way the acts of drunks or renegades as others describe).
Hearsay
Speaking of the "Corwin" amendment, it remains, still, a proposed amendment to the Constitution. Two states ratified it, and if it can achieve 3/4ths of the states, it will become part of the Constitution. After all, the 27th Amendment was ratified over 200 years after it was proposed! The proposed "Corwin" amendment reads:
"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."
It seems to me this would be the ultimate statement of "state's rights." It would keep the Federal government out of domestic, state institutions. Would you support an effort to ratify the "Corwin" amendment?
What do you really think?
Are you to be numbered among the nutcases who swear that Lincoln suspended the Constitution and the United States has secretly been governed under the "Lieber Codes" since 1863?
Don't be stupid, capitan. Lincoln suspended and/or violated great parts of the constitution during the war, and constitutional government has never been the same since he did this, but the practical form of government found under the Constitution did indeed return at the war's end where it continues for the most part to govern to this day (though an increasing propensity to violate it has marked the latter half of the 20th century).
Actually it's four states that ratified it, though one by questionable means. Ohio and Maryland voted it straight up. Illinois approved it but they did so in the middle of a constitutional convention. The final one was done by the legislature of the so-called "Restored Government of Virginia" at Wheeling. Lincoln recognized that government as the legitimate one for Virginia, though others do not. So while it is certain that they ratified it, a question exists as to whether their ratification counts as being from the state of Virginia or the state of West Virginia. As an interesting aside, there was a slight renewed historical attention toward the amendment in the early 1960's when it was "rediscovered" with the interest surrounding the centenial of the war. A handful of state legislators in other states took interest in it as an experiment over what would happen to an amendment that had sat on the books unratified for 100 years and as far as I know, a few of them even sponsered ratification bills. I don't know of any that passed or even made it out of committee though.
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.