Posted on 08/23/2002 11:48:38 AM PDT by Aurelius
...it left slaves that Lincoln and the North could have freed as slaves and 'freed' those slaves Lincoln had no authority to free...
And how was Lincoln to free them, except by Constitutional amendment? Which he did.
Politicians always have an honorable(*) ostensible reason for their actions.
"(You can't possibly believe otherwise....)"
Oh can't I? I sure as hell can, as can anybody whose brain functions have not been totally screwed up during their confinement in the Government school system.
(*)Or supposedly honorable, I wouldn't consider preserving the Union at the expense of those who wished to exercise their rights of self-determination by leaving the Union honorable. With regard to "saving the Union" generations of Americans have been doubly brain-washed in their government schools. First, in that Lincoln was motivated primarily by a desire to "save the Union"; secondly, that that in itself was an honorable cause.
As far as the slander of Lee, don't try to turn words on me - this is major league history and I think you are an amature, who while a certain deeper interest and grasp is shown by your words - you exhibit a perspective that was the original intention of the revisionist all along.
Deo Vindice
I'm always honest. As for you, I certainly hope that you will try; whether you are capable of it remains to be seen. Based on what I've seen up to date, I don't find the prognosis very favorable, I'm sorry to say.
No, the view was that Lincoln's election meant the abolition of the Tenth Amendment. And it was, after a river of blood was shed.
I'll ask again. What did I say to slander Lee? If this is major league and I'm such a minor league participant then it shouldn't be hard for someone of your caliber to prove me wrong. So let's have it.
Fort Sumter was a preemtive strike - taken after Lincoln took action to use the Fort as a base of aggression against the peaceful South...
How so? Fort Sumter was federal property. It was built by the federal government on man-made island - made from granite shipped down from New England. It was located on territory given to the federal government by act of the South Carolina legislature. It was not, in any sense of the word, the property of South Carolina. Why should Lincoln have just turned it over? The soldiers there made not a single hostile act towards the people of South Carolina. The didn't interfere with shipping into and out of the port, did not fire until fired upon. Where is this aggression you speak of? It seems to me that aggression was all on the part of the south.
Lincoln did not take either action. He took a political route in 1862 which was 'toothless' and he knew it. He even issued the Emancipation Proclamation in September 1862; with an effective date of January 1865; to allow states time to return to federal control, with the promise of keeping their slavery institution intact.
Your move, sir. I'm fixing dinner for my four children....later.
I am interested in your opinion, was the war fought because of slavery or taxes? I don't know of any other motives.
False. Read some of the Declarations of Secession. They make no bones about the fact that they seceded to preserve slavery.
...sorry typo; hard to type with a baby in your lap....
An executive order may have the force of law, but it does not supercede the Constitution. Lincoln could not end slavery by executive order or legislation, your claims about extraconstatutional powere notwithstanding. It took an amendment to the Constitution and Lincoln knew it.
As to the timing. Lincoln didn't start the Civil war, and he didn't pursue the war for any reason other than to preserve the Union. There is the famous quote to Horace Greely on what the policy he seemed to be pursuing was, and he answered it by saying to preserve the Union. The ending of slavery was, as you pointed out, a happy byproduct of the rebellion. It started as a military act to allow the Union army to protect slaves that fled to their lines and prevent their being returned, regardless of the outcome of the war (and in 1862 that outcome was still in doubt). Lincoln's timing in this regard may have been late in the eyes of some, it may have been early in the eyes of others, but he did do it. He expended the political capital necessary to ensure that the amendment passed out of Congress and went to the states. He did it and ended slavery in our country.
BTW, the effective date of the Emancipation Proclamation was January 1863, but I'm sure you knew that. Interestingly enough, Lee beat the Emancipation Proclamation only by one or two days in manumitting his own slaves.
Finally, when it comes to 'extraconstitutional actions' on the part of a president, I would like to suggest something. Read the confederate constitution some time. Note the part in Article III that says that the judiciary of the confederacy will be made up of a supreme court and such minor courts and congess would establish. Then do a little research and try to find the name of one member of the confederate supreme court. Just one. Any one justice will do.
That was the date I think. When did the riots in New York break out when Linclon drafted the good northerners to free the slaves?
As I realize you are a expert on this, did the confederate constitution forbide the importation of slaves at any point in time?
With regards to the Supreme Court of the CSA it was never created because of internal sectional and political conflict. Judah Benjamin, the brilliant person he was, ended up the only 'Federal' officer of the courts for the CSA as the Attorney General.
Your move.
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.