Replies

even though he did so as a Circuit Court judge, and not as a Supreme Court Justice.

Circuit court rulings are matters of legal weight too, you know, and especially so when they are not appealed and overturned. Try again.

I'm not a lawyer, thank God, but I think a personal opinion written by a judge with a vested interest -- Taney was a slave owner with strong leanings towards slave power interests -- needs to be considered in its proper light. Taney was flirting with treason himself. He had no standing to make any ruling at all. He should have recused himself. But Lincoln showed himself a pretty canny lawyer too. He didn't need to arrest Taney -- that much is obvious because of the triumph of Union arms. I mean, after all, the traitors --were-- thrown down, their conspiracy --was-- foiled.

We may be taking this all from the wrong tack. If all you can point to is Merryman, you can in a sense pretty much be countered with a "so what?"

In this same time frame the mayor and police chief of Baltimore were actively aiding and abetting treason in that city. railroad bridges --were-- burned, telegraph lines --were- cut; there -was- an attempt by the slave power to consumate their revolution by destroying the seat of the lawful government.

You discount all that. You won't take the real world events into consideration. I don't suppose that is too surprising from someone who implies the Emancipation Proclamation should be revoked.

Walt

And they had "help" on the way.

"Raise the Flag, & Go!"

South Carolina Governor F. W. Pickens to Gen. James Simons of the 4th Brigade, S.C. Militia.

Dear Genl:

The Navy yard at Norfolk is all in flames -- Baltimore unanimous on our side, and all communications with Washington cut off -- & only 5,000 troops in Washington -- it can be taken.

Troops are meeting from Augusta to Norfolk & will be there before we start.

Send Gregg immediately with as many as he can get -- wait not a moment, or we are ruined. I will send companies as fast as possible. Let Gregg start immediately with as many possible -- no delay -- for God sake make every thing move. Let Kershaws start with as many companies as he can get immediately. I have seen Beauregard, & he is sending the detailed orders.

We will be disgraced if Georgia gets there before we do. Raise the flag, & go -- My whole heart is with you. Washington is cut off -- and if we could march on it we could take it -- as Baltimore is a unit for us and Maryland rising. They are alarmed in Va. Genl. Taliaferro & Letcher both telegraph me this morning to push forward.

Chronology: 1861

April 17: Virginia convention voted for secession.

April 18: Five companies of Pennsylvania troops reached Washington, the first to arrive. The U.S. Armory at Harper's Ferry, Va., at the confluence of the Potomac and the Shenandoah, was abandoned and burned by its garrison. In Richmond, the U.S. Custom House and Post Office was taken over by state troops on order of the Virginia Governor W.B. Letcher and two vessels seized in the James River. A pro-secession flag was raised on Federal Hill in Baltimore. Virginia was rapidly arming and organizing its state troops to defend its territory, even though not yet officially part of the Confederacy. President Davis told Gov. Letcher that the Confederacy would furnish whatever aid it could.

President Lincoln received eyewitness reports of what had happened at Charleston, quartered a group known as the "Frontier Guards" composed of Kansas men in the East Room of the White House.

April 19: President Lincoln declares blockade of Confederate states. Baltimore riots as the Sixth Massachusetts transfers trains in Baltimore. In Washington politicians as well as military men were organizing companies, patrolling streets, and guarding Federal buildings.

April 20: Several railroad bridges were burned to prevent passage of Union troops from Baltimore to Washington while rioting continued in the Maryland city. Col. Robert E. Lee formally resigned his commission in the U.S. Army. The night of April 20 the Federal Gosport Navy Yard near Norfolk, Va. was evacuated and partially burned by the garrison and several vessels scuttled.

Taney was a slave owner with strong leanings towards slave power interests -- needs to be considered in its proper light. Taney was flirting with treason himself. He had no standing to make any ruling at all. He should have recused himself.

What absurd logic! A slave-owner that could never rule on a case involving slaves would also mean that a NON-slave owner could never rule on cases involving freemen. DUH! Treason, for about the zillionth time, does not include all of the acts which you happen to disagree with, including issuing judicial opinions that blasted Lincoln's actions. But specifically, pray tell, how does his ex parte Merryman decision involve slavery?

But Lincoln showed himself a pretty canny lawyer too. He didn't need to arrest Taney -- that much is obvious because of the triumph of Union arms. I mean, after all, the traitors --were-- thrown down, their conspiracy --was-- foiled. Appeals to force do not legitimize illegal actions.

You discount all that. You won't take the real world events into consideration. I don't suppose that is too surprising from someone who implies the Emancipation Proclamation should be revoked.

Justice Curtis (see above) also thought the EP was illegal. And the ruling in ex parte Milligan also vindicated Taney - not Lincoln. Lincoln simply couldn't usurp powers simply because he wanted to.

I'm not a lawyer, thank God, but I think a personal opinion written by a judge with a vested interest

Any ruling is a personal opinion of the judge who writes it, and you have yet to substantiate exactly what personal interest Taney had in the case.

-- Taney was a slave owner with strong leanings towards slave power interests --

You've said that. Now explain exactly what if anything slave ownership has to do with a ruling on the judicial process of habeas corpus and how it in any way, shape, or form created a vested interest for Taney in Merryman's case. Otherwise your charade will be treated for what it appears to be - an unrelated personal smear on the judge since you have foudn yourself unable to refute his ruling.

Taney was flirting with treason himself.

The Lincoln evidently thought so as well. In reality though, Taney was a properly seated judge with the constitutional authority of the judiciary branch to rule on cases before him. Unless you are denying this power to him, you are full of nonsense.

He had no standing to make any ruling at all.

Sure he did. He was a properly seated judge of the judiciary system established under the U.S. Constitution serving on the circuit for the state where the case arose.

He should have recused himself.

Why and on what grounds?

But Lincoln showed himself a pretty canny lawyer too.

No. The Lincoln simply decided himself to be above the law and ignored the ruling as if it were never made.

He didn't need to arrest Taney

Some evidence exists that he desired to, you know. Taney also thought The Lincoln would try it as well.

We may be taking this all from the wrong tack. If all you can point to is Merryman, you can in a sense pretty much be countered with a "so what?"

No, not really. Merryman is only the physical case that happened in 1861. It makes it indisputable that The Lincoln knew what he was doing was unconstitutional under court precedent and that he was willing to violate a court ruling for him to stop.