My point is that the Davis government and the Confederate congress ignored their constitution and refused to establish a supreme court. If they're going to ignore it in that major area, and if Davis is willing to ignore it by promising to the European countries that he would end slavery in exchange for recognition, then the fact that the constitution contained a clause against protective tariffs is meaningless. Protective tariffs were promised, the tariff passed by the Confederate congress in May 1861 contained tariffs on imported goods that protected local manufacturers, there is no reason that protective tariffs would not have continued.
Refused? That is an interesting observation. Are you familiar with this?
"In the Department of Justice, which includes the Patent Office and Public Printing, some legislative provisions will be required, which will be specifically stated in the report of the head of that Department. I invite the attention of Congress to the duty of organizing a Supreme Court of the Confederate States; in accordance with the mandate of the Constitution." [Davis to Congress of the Confederate States, Richmond, February 25, 1862, in Monroe & McIntosh, "The Papers of Jefferson Davis." Louisiana State University Press, 1971, Vol.8, pp. 58-64]
It doesn't appear Davis was shirking his duties. Are you familiar with this?
"In spite of the constitutional requirement for the establishment of a supreme court within the judicial structure of the Confederacy, in spite of the historical need for a court of supreme jurisdiction, the supreme court authorized by the Confederate Constitution never came into being... The Confederacy was a short-lived experiment and, in so far as a test to determine the need for a supreme court is concerned, it was an experiment conducted in an inadequate laboratory. That its life was unhindered by the absence of a supreme court was due more to the necessity for mutual assistance and support at a time when the nation's existence was at stake than to the ability of a group of states to coexist without a national court of last resort. That the nation could have continued to exist so unhindered in times of peace is a question still open to debate. And so the query, so often posed by so many people, as to the necessity for a supreme court in our system of democratic government must, in so far as the experience of the Confederacy is concerned, remains unanswered." [Jose M. Cabanillas, "A Nation Without a Supreme Court." University of Richmond Law Review, Vol.2, Iss.2, Art.6, 1964, pp.94, 98-99]
Do you have a source for your assertion that "the Davis government and the Confederate congress ignored their constitution and refused to establish a supreme court"?
*****************
>>DoodleDawg wrote: "If they're going to ignore it in that major area, and if Davis is willing to ignore it by promising to the European countries that he would end slavery in exchange for recognition, then the fact that the constitution contained a clause against protective tariffs is meaningless."
I will agree the Constitution of the United States was meaningless to the tyrant Abraham Lincoln; but I am unconvinced of your argument about Davis. Do you have any sources that provide context in support of your argument?
*****************
>>DoodleDawg wrote: "Protective tariffs were promised, the tariff passed by the Confederate congress in May 1861 contained tariffs on imported goods that protected local manufacturers, there is no reason that protective tariffs would not have continued"
Protective tariff? Was the tariff used to promote or foster any branch of industry, or was it used strictly to raise revenue? What is your source?
Assuming the topic at hand remains "the cause of the war," what does any of this have to do with the topic at hand?
Mr. Kalamata