Lawyer hair splitting. It is a "difference" without a distinction. It is an amusing fiction.
Under the Confiscation Acts of 1861 and 1862. The legality of which was upheld by the Prize Cases ruling issued by the Supreme Court in 1863.
In Calvin's Case, the Court did exactly what the King wanted them to do as well. This is just more Kabuki dance to create the perception of legitimacy, a court prior to Lincoln would not have ruled in such a way.
And you're drifting into lala land again.
I've already posted the statement made by Lincoln's body guard, and another reference to it made by a former Mayor of Boston. It is better sourced than a lot of other things in history that are accepted.
The problem with you is that I could go to the trouble of finding this information again, posting it, and it would not cause you to make the slightest effort to recant your claim or your snark. You just don't care what is the truth, You have what you want to believe, and you don't want to see anything that doesn't fit into your mantra.
Your response to anything you don't want to hear is "La la la la la la la!"
Your contempt for the English language is duly noted.
In Calvin's Case, the Court did exactly what the King wanted them to do as well. This is just more Kabuki dance to create the perception of legitimacy, a court prior to Lincoln would not have ruled in such a way.
So you say. For what it's worth.
I've already posted the statement made by Lincoln's body guard, and another reference to it made by a former Mayor of Boston. It is better sourced than a lot of other things in history that are accepted.
And as I've pointed out in the past not a single Taney biographer has found any evidence at all of such an order. But you seem to prefer the 19th Century version of the National Enquirer for you sources.
You just don't care what is the truth.
I care very much. I just know better than to expect it from you.