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

To: TexConfederate1861
If indeed the right of secession exists, then from the time South Carolina seceded, Ft. Sumter was no longer Federal property, and if so, then keeping a garrison in it was an illegal act, which would justify an attack.

Assuming for the sake of arguement that South Carolina's secession was legal, what rule of law miraculously transferred ownership of Sumter to South Carolina? Without congesssional approval. Without compensation. Without the owner of the property having any say whatsoever in the transaction.

843 posted on 11/30/2006 12:49:46 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 837 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur

When secession occurred, all public lands reverted back to S.C.


845 posted on 11/30/2006 1:51:22 PM PST by TexConfederate1861 ("Having a picture of John Wayne doesn't make you a Texan :) ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | 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