Right, he called them back five months early.
So let's notice some facts about this:
Because Congress can manufacture money out of thin air?
That makes my point. Why didn't Lincoln call his Congress back earlier, say about two weeks after Fort Sumter like Jefferson Davis did his? Wasn't the situation serious enough?
1.Pro-Confederate claims that the Federal government was in dire financial straights are not supported by Lincoln's choice to call Congress back in July.
If the Federal government was as hard-up as they allege, then Lincoln would need Congress immediately.
Was the New York Times pro-Confederate? It reported what was said about the depleted state of the Treasury in February 1861 (i.e., the financial straits) [Link].
You make a strange argument for the delay in reconvening Congress. While Lincoln's incentive to provoke war was economic, his objective after the attack on Fort Sumter expedition was to cement that war in place by invading the South and blockading their ports, all without any Congressional interference. That was his way of solving the two-tariff situation that had the potential to ruin the Northern economy.
As I noted far above in this thread, Lincoln was still concerned with getting sufficient revenue to run the government after the attack on Fort Sumter. He used that as an excuse for not moving toward peace and conciliation as urged by the Baltimore delegation that had an audience with him ("... what is to become of the revenue? I shall have no government -- no resources."). He wouldn't have sufficient revenue if he didn't blockade Southern ports. So, he didn't want peace.
So, how did Lincoln get funds without convening Congress? He took funds authorized by Congress for one purpose and used them for another purpose. Bur that is unconstitutional.
Members of Congress pointed out the following unconstitutional acts that Lincoln did while he kept Congress out of session until July 4, 1861 including unconstitutionally moving funds around. The following is just a partial list of the unconstitutional acts Congress members accused Lincoln of doing:
(1) No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law. Lincoln violated this part of the Constitution by spending unauthorized money and shifting money from authorized purposes.
(2) Congress has the power to raise and support armies, not Lincoln. Congress has the power to provide and maintain a navy, not Lincoln. Lincoln accepted the service of volunteers for three years without warrant of law. Congress has the power to control the size of the Army and Navy, not Lincoln.
(3) Congress alone had the power to declare war and blockade the ports of a belligerent.
Those weren't the only unconstitutional things that Lincoln or members of his administration did during that pre-July period:
(4) The suspension of habeas corpus by the executive when it is clear (to me and others anyway including Hamilton and Jay) that the Legislature is the body with that power. If Lincoln had that power, why did Congress in 1863 authorize him to do it in the future?
Lincoln delegated the power to suspend habeas corpus (or the privilege, etc.) to Army officers, their subordinates, and the Secretary of War. Such power was even used to prevent inquiry into whether individual soldiers were underage, hardly a matter requiring the suspension of habeas corpus. The Lincoln Administration kept a judge under house arrest to prevent him from going to court. They arrested another judge for trying to follow Ex parte Merryman, which was a legal court order.
Speaking of Ex parte Merryman, here is an excerpt from that order by Chief Justice Taney that says [my emphasis below]:
The Constitution provides, as I have before said, that "no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." It declares that's the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." It provides that the party accused shall be entitled to a speedy trial in a court of justice.
And these great and fundamental laws which Congress itself could not suspend, have been disregarded and suspended, like the writ of habeas corpus, by a military order, supported by force of arms. Such is the case now before me, and I can only say that if the authority which the Constitution has confided, to the Judiciary Department, and judicial offices may thus upon any pretext and under any circumstances, be usurped by the military power at its discretion, the people or the United States are no longer living under a Government of laws, but every citizen holds life, liberty and property at the will and pleasure of the army officer in whose military district he may happen to be found.
Several Bill of Rights Amendments were violated by Lincoln in the case of Merryman. As Taney said, even Congress itself couldn’t suspend them. (Much less approve them after the fact.)
So, during the interim between the attack on Fort Sumter and the delayed recall of Congress, Lincoln assumed the powers of Congress, the powers of the Judicial Branch, and even violated some of the Bill of Rights.
I presume you have been upset by Obama rewriting the Affordable Care Act on his own multiple times. Similarly, I suspect that you didn’t like Obama accomplishing what Congress would not pass by using regulations issued by the EPA and other government departments. You’ve probably been upset by the Obama Administration stonewalling legal requests for documents and his departments continuing to do what courts had ruled that they stop doing.
How do you justify Lincoln doing what he did? Or is it OK with you that Obama assumed Legislative and Judicial powers also? Remember from Ex Parte Milligan (1866) about the Lincoln military trying Milligan while the civil courts in Indiana were open and running:
The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances. No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government.
Congress can’t excuse or approve obvious violations of the Constitution after the fact. They don’t have that power. Such power would lead to anarchy or despotism. It would have been consistent with the Constitution if Lincoln had quickly convened Congress and had them authorize his actions beforehand.
All of this reminds me of Comey and Lynch not charging Hillary with her obvious violations of law. Lincoln was their president -- they weren't going to go after their guy for violating the Constitution.
Back to the question of Lincoln and the expedition to Fort Sumter. Lincoln had accomplished what he wanted with his expedition to Fort Sumter. He had to solve the two tariff situation that would ruin the Northern economy. I previously posted that his cabinet and military advisors had told him the result of Fox’s expedition would be a shooting war. Remember what he told Gustavus Fox who conceived the plan and was in charge of the expedition?
"You and I both anticipated that the cause of the country would be advanced by making the attempt to provision Ft. Sumter, even if it had failed; and it is no small consolation now to feel that our anticipation is justified by the results."
When I followed that with, “The result of the Sumter expedition was war,” you replied:
[You]:… with war now started, he could take military actions to defeat the rebellion.
Precisely. He got the war he wanted. Lincoln took an action that his advisors told him would provoke war, and afterwards he seemed satisfied that it resulted in war. After the attack on Fort Sumter, he proclaimed a blockade on Southern ports, an internationally recognized act of war. The blockade would solve the two tariff problem that the Northern port cities and merchants (and Lincoln) had been so concerned about.
Tariff revenue was already collapsing due to the Morrill tariff and loss of Southern trade. I've posted how the revenue in 1861 compared with 1860 revenue [Link, note also that old "pro-Confederate" New York Times of yours quoted about the revenue in this link also]. Maybe the Federal government issued bonds or got loans to get money to keep running. Or perhaps that shortage of funds and revenue is why Lincoln unconstitutionally moved funds that Congress had appropriated for one purpose and spent it in another area.
More later.
2. Lincoln only called up 75,000 Union troops, this six weeks after the Confederacy called up 100,000 troops.
The Confederacy did not call up 100,000 troops six weeks before April 12. The Confederate Congress authorized Jefferson Davis to ask for up to that many volunteers when he felt they were needed. Here's the first part of the March 6 act by the Confederate Congress that authorized Davis to call for volunteers if and when needed:
The Congress of the Confederate States of America do enact, That in order to provide speedily forces to repel invasion, maintain the rightful possession of the Confederate States of America in every portion of territory belonging to each State, and to secure the public tranquility and independence against threatened assault, the President be, and he is hereby authorized to employ the militia, military and naval forces of the Confederate States of America, and to ask for and accept the services of any number of volunteers, not exceeding one hundred thousand, who may offer their services, either as cavalry, mounted riflemen, artillery or infantry, in such proportion of these several arms as he may deem expedient, to serve for twelve months after they shall be mustered into service, unless sooner discharged.
I note that these volunteers were intended to protect against invasion, maintain possessions (no doubt including forts) within the Confederacy, and secure independence against threatened assault. Davis was given the authority to ask for up to 100,000 volunteers as he may deem expedient. Nothing like that number were actually asked for or "called up" as you phrased it before the attack on Fort Sumter.
Davis thought it was expedient to ask for 20,000 of those volunteers on April 8 right after Lincoln informed the South that he was going to force his way into Fort Sumter with warships and troops if opposed. This was after Lincoln told the South that the fort would be evacuated (through his agent Lamon and through misleading messages by Seward to the Confederate Commissioners then in Washington to negotiate a peaceful resolution of issues). The Confederate Commissioners called Lincoln’s actions "gross perfidy" on April 10, and Major Anderson in Fort Sumter called it the start of the war when informed that Lincoln's expedition was coming.
South Carolina on its own may have called up about 10,000 troops before then, and Davis may have asked for smaller number of volunteers for specific locations a time or two before the attack on Sumter and the confrontation at Fort Pickens. I think in the past I estimated the total number of volunteers from what I could find out at about 40,000 at most, spread over the South, many of them local militias organizing without Davis asking for them. If I remember correctly, there were about 12,000 to 15,000 Confederate forces at Charleston at the time of the attack on Fort Sumter, but I don't have time this morning to track down my old figure (busy with a family occasion).
At the same time before the attack on Fort Sumter, Lincoln was meeting in private with many Northern Republican governors asking how many troops they could supply him and telling them to get ready. Pennsylvania went on a "war footing" after the governor met with Lincoln, and Massachusetts had begun gathering and equipping troops as early as January or February (both from memory).
The Confederate Congress's action authorizing Davis to ask for up to 100,000 volunteers on March 6th was prompted by Lincoln's inaugural speech on March 4 [Link]. Here was the reaction on March 5 in Montgomery, Alabama, where the Confederate Congress was meeting, to Lincoln's March 4 speech:
Latest from Montgomery
War considered Inevitable -- The Standing Army -- The War Strength
Montgomery, March 5 -- Since the receipt of the Inaugural address of Mr. Lincoln, it is universally conceded here that war between the Confederate States and the United States is inevitable. Mr. Benjamin said last night, that in his opinion, there would be a clash of Arms within thirty days.
Mr. Conrad concurred in this view of the aspect of affairs. The standing army of the Confederate States will be fixed at ten thousand men. Congress is now engaged in organizing the army. Of course, in case of hostilities, the number of men put in the field will be greater. It is calculated that the States now composing the Confederacy can place 80,000 on a movable war footing. [Source: Gazette and Sentinel, Plaquemine, Louisiana, March 9, 1861]
In such a situation, Davis would have been remiss if he did not prepare for what might happen. Certainly Lincoln was getting prepared as well.