GOPc - "Vallandigham and a congressman from Maryland (i'll have to look up his name) detained in 1861."
Vallandigham had not been re-elected in 1862. He was no longer a sitting congressman when he was arrested by order of Gen. Burnside in May 1863. Vallandigham was a candidate for the Democrat nomination for Governor at the time. His campaign was not going so well and he courted arrest for the publicity. It seems he forgot the old saying, "Be careful what you ask for. You may get it."
"The claim that the second convention was a continuation of the first is wholly specious as a substantial part of the membership of the first, including its president, were in Neosho."
The second meeting of the Missouri convention had a quorum of the members who attended the first session. When the Convention met on July 22, it declared the renegade government null and void. The renegade legislature would not meet in Neosho until October, and, even if they could claim legitimacy, never achieve quorum (at least, no official records exist to show that was the case, nor that the special session was lawfully called by the Governor).
"Mindless sophistry to justify government enforced robbery. If compensation after a new tax is less than compensation before that tax then compensation has diminished, especially if it is the dispenser of compensation itself that is retaining the tax."
If your ... uhhhh ... "reasoning" were valid, then it could be concluded that Federal judges don't have to pay income taxes, or tax increases, because it would decrease their "compensation." Sorry, "that dawg don't hunt."
"So I take it you believe that judges are not allowed to do legal writings? You are incorrect, BTW, as to having a "prepared" opinion. Taney voiced the issue in a letter to Congress."
Taney had prepared several opinions during the war dealing with issues ranging from the legality of income tax to conscription. They were all designed to thwart the Lincoln Administration, because Taney was, fundamentally, a disloyal southerner.
"Nothing gratuitous about it. You know as well as anyone about the 75,000-whatever man army that Lincoln raised in April. He called them to Washington for a prepared assault on Virginia even though Virginia did not secede for another month."
Still, no substantiation on your part.
Lincoln called for the raising of troops on April 15, 1861. They were to be stationed and utilized all over the Union, not just in Washington, D.C. or Virginia. On April 17, the Virginia legislature passed a secession ordinance, subject to a popular referendum. On April 18, Virginia militia under the direction of secessionist former Virginia Governor Wise unlawfully seized the arsenal at Harper's Ferry. On April 19th, secessionist forces attacked the Gosport naval yard.
These, and similar acts all preceded the May 23rd referendum. Armed insurrection was present in Virgina well before it seceded. In fact, secessionist activity preceeded the arrival of the first federal troops (6th Massaachusetts) in Washington on April 19-20. If Lincoln had aimed the entirety of the new, asembling army at Virginia, he would have been wholly justified. But the fact was, he did not.
Taney and took an oath to defend the Constitution, not one to worship Lincoln.
Back to your roots, I see.
1. Lincoln 'saved the Constitution.'
2. Some disagreed that Lincoln was acting per the Constitution.
3. How can they say such a thing about someone who saved the Constitution???
Reelected or not, he was still a congressman and he was arrested for simply voicing opposition political beliefs. Lincoln didn't like dissent be it from congressmen or judges so he suppressed it.
The second meeting of the Missouri convention had a quorum of the members who attended the first session.
Source?
The renegade legislature
They were the only legislature duly elected under the constitution of Missouri. The renegades were the self-appointed military regime back in Jefferson City.
would not meet in Neosho until October, and, even if they could claim legitimacy, never achieve quorum (at least, no official records exist to show that was the case
Wrong. One of the house's journals has been found and shows a quorum. The other is missing but little reason exists to doubt it as all the newspapers reported they had a quorum and gave the vote totals.
If your ... uhhhh ... "reasoning" were valid, then it could be concluded that Federal judges don't have to pay income taxes, or tax increases, because it would decrease their "compensation."
Wrong. The 16th amendment gives Congress the power to collect taxes upon income, thus superseding any inhibition upon it from doing so. That amendment did not exist in 1861.
Taney had prepared several opinions during the war dealing with issues ranging from the legality of income tax to conscription.
And I ask you again, do you believe there is something wrong with a judge writing about legal topics? His challenge to the legality of the income tax, BTW, was perfectly valid and sustained when they tried to pass one again in the late 1800's. That's why it took a constitutional amendment to establish the one today.
Still, no substantiation on your part.
Now you're simply being slothful. Nobody disputes that he raised the army, nobody disputes that he brought it to DC, and nobody disputes that he brought it there BEFORE Virginia seceded.
They were to be stationed and utilized all over the Union, not just in Washington, D.C. or Virginia.
Yet for some reason thousands upon thousands of them were carted into Washington.
On April 17, the Virginia legislature passed a secession ordinance, subject to a popular referendum.
Yet Virginia did not secede for another month.
On April 18, Virginia militia under the direction of secessionist former Virginia Governor Wise unlawfully seized the arsenal at Harper's Ferry.
Yet Virginia did not secede for another month. The claim upon arsenals, BTW, was a highly disputed legal matter at the time and even southern unionists wanted the ones in their states placed in state hands - in part to keep them from being either used against the state OR seized by a secessionist mob - until secession had been legally decided. Sam Houston was among those who adhered to this position as he urged state authorities to take control of federal installations in Texas even though he opposed secession.
These, and similar acts all preceded the May 23rd referendum.
Yet Virginia still had not seceded. There's a giant mob of left wing wackos walking through the streets of New York City right now. They've stolen and vandalized all sorts of stuff, but is that a reasonable basis to call in the army and send them in to invade and conquer the state of New York?