Replies

"The Government hereby instituted shall take immediate steps for the settlement of all matters between the States forming it and their other late confederates of the United States, in relation to the public property and public debt at the time of their withdrawal from them; these States hereby declaring it to be their wish and earnest desire to adjust everything pertaining to the common property, common liabilities, and common obligations of that Union, upon the principles of right, justice, equity, and good faith."

And just look how that got watered down. It was missing entirely from the final version of the constitution. When the confederate congress passed their legislation authorizing the delegation, the wording had changed from specifically mentioning debt and property to "...the settlement of all questions of disagreement between the two governments upon principles of right, justice, equity, and good faith." Davis watered it down even further in his letter to Lincoln, making an offer to "...agree, treat, consult, and negotiate of and concerning all matters and subjects interesting to both nations..." What if Davis didn't find responsibility for debt or payment for property seized a matter or subject of interest? I suppose it wouldn't have come up for discussion.

Regardless, both the confederate congress and Jefferson Davis made any talks contingent on the Lincoln administration first recognizing confederate sovereignty. If Lincoln had admitted that their acts of secession were legal then wouldn't that have meant recognizing all their steps to date, including repudiating debt and seizing federal property, legal as well? Removing any need for payment of any kind?

Lincoln, making an offer to "...agree, treat, consult, and negotiate of and concerning all matters and subjects interesting to both nations..." What if Davis didn't find responsibility for debt or payment for property seized a matter or subject of interest? I suppose it wouldn't have come up for discussion.

Objection your Honor, Learned counsel for the Union is introducing fact not in evidence. The mere fact that he has proposed the question ---- What if Davis didn't find responsibility for debt or payment for property seized a matter or subject of interest? I suppose it wouldn't have come up for discussion. What ifs are not relevant, facts are what is needed. They proposed a settlement of debt, they send commissioners to settle debt, they were ignored. These your Honor, are facts before the court. What ifs and could have beens are mere dust in the Tempest of history.