[4CJ]

Any observant person would notice that Chase's premise (that the states had never left the union) would negate his conclusion regarding the bonds.

[lentulusgracchus]

Good point about Salmon Chase having tripped over his own premises....good thing he had a compliant bench to help him out.

And thanks for the post on Marshall, otherwise Wlat would go on lying about U.S. history until the red cows come home. You noticed, I take it, that he always jumps in with the same two points in every thread, on which you beat him senseless three or four threads ago. Talk about dishonesty, and hiding behind a keyboard. Thanks for bringing the antidote -- and the Lysol.

Talk about pathetic.

[nolu chan]

Mr. Justice Grier gave a nice assessment of the legal issue:

Now, whether we assume the State of Texas to be judicially in the Union (though actually out of it) or not, it will not alter the case. The contest now is between the State of Texas and her own citizens. She seeks to annul a contract with the respondents, based on the allegation that there was no authority in Texas competent to enter into an agreement during the rebellion. Having relied upon one fiction, namely, that she is a State in the Union, she now relies upon a second one, which she wishes this court to adopt, that she was not a State at all during the five years that she was in rebellion. She now sets up the plea of insanity, and asks the court to treat all her acts made during the disease as void.