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

To: 4ConservativeJustices
No. Please post the federal law equating secession to treason.

The Supreme Court ruling in the Prize Cases refers to secessionists as traitors, as you well know.

Walt

315 posted on 08/20/2003 3:48:03 AM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
The Supreme Court ruling in the Prize Cases refers to secessionists as traitors, as you well know.

So. It's obiter dicta. Grier had already stated that the Confederacy - as a matter of fact - had 'cast off their allegiance' to the federal government. He also recognized the duality of that allegiance,

'The co-existence of Federal and State sovereignties, and the double allegiance of the people of the States, which no statesman or lawyer has doubted till now, and which this Court has repeatedly recognized as lying at the foundation of some of its most important decisions; the delegation of special and limited powers to the Federal Government, with the express reservation of all other powers 'to the States and the people thereof' who created the Union and established the Constitution.'
I previously posted the US law (1 Stat. 112, 1790) covering treason, which states taht it applies ONLY to, 'any person or persons, owing allegiance to the United States of America'. No treason could be possible for the Confederacy.

Grier also states,

'When the party in rebellion occupy and hold in a hostile manner a certain portion of territory; have declared their independence; have cast off their allegiance; have organized armies; have commenced hostilities against their former sovereign, the world acknowledges them as belligerents, and the contest a war.' [emphasis mine]
Belligerents. A war. Not a rebellion. It was made into a public war, aided by none other than Lincoln himself. A blockade is an international act demanding foreign recognition that a war exists, else the captures at prize are nullities.

Even Grier admits it was a war:

'But it is not necessary to constitute war, that both parties should be acknowledged as independent nations or sovereign States. A war may exist where one of the belligerents, claims sovereign rights as against the other.'
Again, the proof is by the actions. The union and the Confederacy exercised belligerents rights,
'[T]he parties to a civil war usually concede to each other belligerent rights. They exchange prisoners, and adopt the other courtesies and rules common to public or national wars.'

The kicker? Grier wrote that the 'parties belligerent in a public war are independent nations.'

A legal recognition of secession.

318 posted on 08/20/2003 5:56:46 AM PDT by 4CJ (Come along chihuahua, I want to hear you say yo quiero taco bell. - Nolu Chan, 28 Jul 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | 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