Davis only gave ONE subsequet speech to Congress after the 1862 address. Thus your complaint is misleading.
That would seem to imply that Mr. Foote thought that Mr. Benjamin was up to something, not that he was acting on behalf of the Davis regime.
Regardless of what Foote thought, it does not change the fact that Benjamin was lobbying for the court bill.
Unless, of course, the Davis regime was trying to organize a court that would please the secretary of state. Hardly evidence in support of Davis.
Then I ask you once again: Was or was not Judah Benjamin a Davis ally? If he was then his actions may indeed be cited as evidence supporting Davis. I should also probably ask what evidence you have that Foote's charge against Benjamin's motives was true, other than, of course, that they are of a highly conspiratorial nature not unlike the stuff you naturally attract to in your own dementia.
And in the senate the legislation was constantly opposed, postponed, put off, and deferred by a variety of senators.
Yeah, and you know why? Cause the states-righters crowd, aka the Davis opponents, had a MAJORITY in the senate!
What you haven't presented is any actions by allies of Davis to override these delays or
Uh, yes I have. The journal is full of them in fact - Davis allies moved to take up the bill or proceed on it or amend i repeatedly. Sometimes they were blocked and the measure was immediately postponed. Other times they got in a couple hours of debate or a couple changes and the sort, before seeing the measure voted down etc. There are dozens upon dozens of these cases, including the ones I posted for you.
indeed, any indication that all the senators involved were foes of the Davis regime. They could very well be allies of Davis in the senate.
Earth to stupid: as has been previously noted and extensively documented, the members who blocked the bill were a states-rights anti-Davis majority headed by Yancey and Wigfall. Those two were by no means allies of the Davis administration by any standard. Oh, and find me ANY credible historian who maintains otherwise and you win a cookie.
Why would Davis 'enthusiastically' fill lower courts but not fight for the one court required by the constituion?
Seeing as you have NOT demonstrated a failure to fight for the supreme court, such a question is without basis in fact and need not be responded to. Try again.
The one which, coincidentally, might be in a position to oppose his actions?
Why would a court of Davis' ideological allies who HE appointed because he know they were his ideological allies work to undermine him? That makes about as much sense as stating that FDR feared his court appointments would undermine the New Deal.
So how did we get from 8 instances of Davis papers referring to a supreme court, as you claimed in reply 631, to 8 explicit references to creating a supreme court?
Cause the INDEX, as I have previously noted several times (though it thus far appears to have failed in breaching your thick head), explicitly places the term "Supreme Court" under the heading "Confederate States:" as you may find here http://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/PubVol.cfm?doc_id=1658
In light of this indexing Davis could not have been referring to any other supreme court but the one he wanted in the CSA.
I hate to bust your bubble but Davis didn't even give that one, he sent a message written by his secretary (who may have been the one who actually wanted the supreme court). After that he sent well over 200 messages to congress and not a single one ever referred to a supreme court ever again. Must have slipped his mind, huh?
Regardless of what Foote thought, it does not change the fact that Benjamin was lobbying for the court bill.
All Foote says is that Benjamin was trying to organize a court to his advantage. For all we know it had nothing to do with the senate bill, which just called for organizing the court, it didn't specify the organization itself.
Earth to stupid
Well, I think that's enough discussion. Call me when your cramps subside.