Posted on 06/16/2020 1:29:49 PM PDT by robowombat
Right. In my post I was wrong-footing another poster and attempting to get him to stop repeating, without thinking, stuff he had probably read somewhere.
That is an interesting comment.
Here's what a real antifa member said:
Dear Dr. Scott:
Respecting your August 1 inquiry calling attention to my often expressed admiration for General Robert E. Lee, I would say, first, that we need to understand that at the time of the War between the States the issue of secession had remained unresolved for more than 70 years. Men of probity, character, public standing and unquestioned loyalty, both North and South, had disagreed over this issue as a matter of principle from the day our Constitution was adopted.
General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was a poised and inspiring leader, true to the high trust reposed in him by millions of his fellow citizens; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his faith in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.
From deep conviction, I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee’s calibre would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the Nation’s wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.
Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall.
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
"The laws of the United States must be executed. I have no discretionary power on the subject-my duty is emphatically pronounced in the Constitution. Those who told you that you might peaceably prevent their execution, deceived you-they could not have been deceived themselves. They know that a forcible opposition could alone prevent the execution of the laws, and they know that such opposition must be repelled. Their object is disunion, hut be not deceived by names; disunion, by armed force, is TREASON."
Lincoln, on the other hand, was carrying out his constitutional duty to suppress insurrection. This duty is spelled out in the constitution and the means to do so was later delegated to the executive branch by congress in the militia acts of 1792 and 1795.
Actually it was not treason. States are sovereign and have the right to unilateral secession. That’s why nobody - not even Jefferson Davis was prosecuted for Treason.
“If you bring these [Confederate] leaders to trial it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution secession is not rebellion. Lincoln wanted Davis to escape, and he was right. His capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one.” Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, July 1867 (Foote, The Civil War, Vol. 3, p. 765)
“If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not a rebellion. His [Jefferson Davis] capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason” Chief Justice Salmon P Chase [as quoted by Herman S. Frey, in Jefferson Davis, Frey Enterprises, 1977, pp. 69-72]
I’ve seen that quote cited several times, yet have never been able to find where it originally came from. I find it highly unlikely that the man who said this; “Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union composed of indestructible States.” as the Chief Justice of the supreme court would have stated secession was not rebellion.
I have found that Chase did not want Davis brought to trial, but not for the reason the quote states. He believed that the 14th Amendment already punished Davis, and the other rebel leaders, by stripping them of their voting rights. So it would be double jeopardy to also convict him in court.
Case of Davis, 7 F. Cas. 63, 102 (C.C.D. Va. 1867)
Nevertheless, the fact still stands that the southern rebels were pardoned for committing treason by Andrew Jackson. And that Davis was pardoned by President Carter in 1978. So they might never have been convicted of treason, but they did commit it and were pardoned for it.
I provided two sources for the quote. The fact remains that the states are sovereign. That they never delegated the power to the federal government to prevent each state from unilaterally seceding, and that the 10th amendment makes clear that any powers not delegated to the federal government by the states remains with the states.
In addition to that, 3 states passed express provisos openly stating at the time of ratification of the constitution, that they retained the power of unilateral secession. Included in that were the two biggest and most powerful states which happened to be the leaders of the two sections of the then 13 states. Every state understood itself to have that right.
There is no provision in the constitution which allows the federal government to prevent it. Secession is not treason. The union is voluntary and is based on consent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.