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

To: rustbucket
March 26, 1862 The Senate proceeded, as a Committe of the Whole, to the consideration of the bill (S.19) to organize the Supreme Court of the Confederate States. After debate, on motion for Mr. Semmes Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed.

September 26, 1862 So the Senate proceeded, as a Committe of the Whole, to the consideration of the bill (S.19) to organize the Supreme Court of the Confederate States. On the motion by Mr. Clark, that the motion to taking up the said bill, on the motion by Mr. Phelan that the Senate adjourn, it was decided in the negative. On the question, to agree with the motion of Mr. Clark, On the motion by Mr. Phelan, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow at 12 o'clock.

September 27, 1862 The Senate resumed, as a Committe of the Whole, to the consideration of the bill (S.19) to organize the Supreme Court of the Confederate States. On the motion of Mr. Sparrow, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed for the present.

January 26, 1863 On the motion by Mr. Henry, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow

January 27, 1863 On the motion by Mr. Sparrow, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

February 3, 1863On the motion by Mr. Oldham, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

February 5, 1863On the motion by Mr. Barnwell, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

Februaru 6, 1863 On the motion by Mr. Johnson of Arkansas, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

February 11, 1863 On the motion by Mr. Sparrow, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

February 13, 1863 On the motion by Mr. Sparrow, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

February 26, 1863 On the motion by Mr. Clark, Ordered, that further consideration of the bill be postponed until tomorrow.

And on, and on , and on. Do you detect a pattern here? An organized conspiracy on the part of the senate to defy the constitution, without any protest at all from the Davis regime? And by allies of his in the senate itself. So the idea that Davis shed any tears or felt any frustration over the lack of a court is ridiculous.

681 posted on 11/21/2003 5:39:03 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies ]


To: Non-Sequitur
And on, and on , and on. Do you detect a pattern here? An organized conspiracy on the part of the senate to defy the constitution, without any protest at all from the Davis regime? And by allies of his in the senate itself. So the idea that Davis shed any tears or felt any frustration over the lack of a court is ridiculous.

They also went into secret session when the subject came up.

The people who opposed the Supreme Court weren't necessarily Davis allies in all things. For example, here is something on Louis Wigfall (Wigfall):

Wigfall supported the unpopular proposals of conscription, impressment, the suspension of habeas corpus and the government takeover of railroads. He opposed any Confederate infringements on states rights, as well as the establishment of a Confederate Supreme Court. Wigfall was a harsh critic of Davis' military policies, and sought to have him removed from command of the Confederate armed forces. His political influence was largely responsible for having pressured Davis into naming Gen. Robert E. Lee general-in-chief of the Confederate forces.

703 posted on 11/21/2003 8:27:24 AM PST by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | View Replies ]

To: Non-Sequitur
The pattern I see is that supporters of the Supreme Court would get outvoted by opponents.

So far you have failed to provide any evidence that Davis was against creating the Supreme Court. You claim he was, but there is documented evidence Davis called for its passage. Care to try your case in front of a jury?

I know you must be tired of trying to defend all the unconstitutional things Lincoln did, but if your only defense is to create a diversion by making unsupported accusations against Davis, then you must have a pretty weak case for defending Lincoln.

708 posted on 11/21/2003 9:05:05 AM PST by rustbucket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 681 | 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