Posted on 02/05/2021 9:28:42 AM PST by Tench_Coxe
In that case the perps were caught, tried & punished, while most of their supporters fled the country to avoid prosecution.
As to just who was "liberal" or "conservative" in 1859: radical Democrats were then working to spread slavery across the USA by outlawing abolition in not just western territories, but also in Northern states via the SCOTUS Dred Scott decision.
No they weren't. Those rich Massholes got away with it.
Also I recently founded out Harriet Tubman was heavily involved in staging the Harper's Ferry raid. This is actual insurrection.
As to just who was "liberal" or "conservative" in 1859: radical Democrats were then working to spread slavery across the USA by outlawing abolition in not just western territories, but also in Northern states via the SCOTUS Dred Scott decision.
Via the privileges and immunities clause, the scope of which was once again made clear by the Dred Scott decision. There never was any legal basis to ban slavery within any state that ratified the US Constitution.
To prohibit citizens of other states to engage in their normal behavior when the Constitution was ratified was an attempt to stage an end run around constitutional intent.
Like I said, most of John Brown's "secret six" fled the country to avoid prosecution.
One even checked himself into a luny-bin to escape the law's reach.
DiogenesLamp: "Via the privileges and immunities clause, the scope of which was once again made clear by the Dred Scott decision.
There never was any legal basis to ban slavery within any state that ratified the US Constitution."
Sure, you're going to ride to the defense of Crazy Roger Taney and his lunatic Dred Scott ruling.
And that insanity explains just why many Northerners, normally tolerant of slavery in the South, switched from Democrat to Republican in 1860, to prevent Southerners from imposing slavery in the North.
DiogenesLamp: "To prohibit citizens of other states to engage in their normal behavior when the Constitution was ratified was an attempt to stage an end run around constitutional intent."
Thus demonstrating that DiogenesLamp is just as deranged as SCOTUS Chief Justice Roger Taney, since no Founder ever claimed their new US Constitution prevented the abolition of slavery in Northern states.
No ballot cast before Election Day is legitimate.
No, i'm simply pointing out that when they wrote the privileges and immunities clause, slavery was a normal part of doing business in the vast majority of states at that time.
They were simply pretending they could get around that clause, but Judge Taney woke them up to the fact that they had been pretending for half a century.
I don't like it, but i'm not going to pretend ugly parts of history didn't happen. I'm not going to pretend ugly laws didn't exist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.