Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: txradioguy
Show me where it wasn't.

Umm,,you seem confused. Backwards actually.

You need to show where it was,,it's a simple concept. How old are you?

311 posted on 08/11/2004 7:57:12 PM PDT by Protagoras (" I believe that's the role of the federal government, to help people"...GWB, 7-23-04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 303 | View Replies ]


To: Protagoras
You need to show where it was,,it's a simple concept.

"The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States. When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration, or revocation, except through revolution, or through consent of the States.

Considered therefore as transactions under the Constitution, the ordinance of secession, adopted by the convention and ratified by a majority of the citizens of Texas, and all the acts of her legislature intended to give effect to that ordinance, were absolutely null. They were utterly without operation in law. The obligations of the State, as a member of the Union, and of every citizen of the State, as a citizen of the United States, remained perfect and unimpaired. It certainly follows that the State did not cease to be a State, nor her citizens to be citizens of the Union." Chief Justice Salmon Chase, from the majority decision in Texas v White [74 US 700] (1868)

319 posted on 08/12/2004 2:22:52 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Jefferson Davis - the first 'selected, not elected' president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies ]

To: Protagoras; Old Sarge

"Umm,,you seem confused. Backwards actually."

No I'm not. I merely asked you for proof to back up your assertion that what was done wasn't illegal.


"You need to show where it was,,it's a simple concept. How old are you?"

If it's such a simple concept...why is it so hard for you to show me factual proof that what the CSA did was legal and what Lincoln did in forcing the CSA to return to the Union was illegal.

And what does my age have to do with anything? It's obvious from your responses that I am older than you.


339 posted on 08/12/2004 1:29:08 PM PDT by txradioguy (HOOAH!!!...Not Just A Word...A Way Of Life!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson