Posted on 07/27/2003 5:08:19 PM PDT by thatdewd
Edited on 05/07/2004 6:46:56 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The writer is a circuit judge who lives in Kuttawa, Ky.
KUTTAWA, Ky. - The Courier Journal, at the behest of its columnist John David Dyche, has called for the removal of the Jefferson Davis statue in the rotunda of the Kentucky State Capitol. Such a supposedly politically correct viewpoint reflects a shallow, selective and even hypocritical understanding of history.
(Excerpt) Read more at courier-journal.com ...
Then how do you explain the following from the November 24, 1864, Daily Picayune?
Our readers have seen the anouncement of the sentence of A. W. McKee by a court-marshal in Louisiana, to be shot, and of the decision by Judge Moise, of the Confederate States District Court in Louisiana, that the court marshal had no jurisdiction over McKee [a civilian], and releasing him from their bonds, to answer any civil offense for which he might be prosecuted.
You seem fond of making claims that others would have a hard time disproving. In this case, however, Gotcha!
This supposedly nonexistent 1864 Confederate States District Court seems to have anticipated the 1866 US Supreme Court ruling in ex parte Milligan. Pity the Yankees didn't have courts willing to stand up in wartime for their citizens' rights (Taney's ex parte Merryman ruling excepted).
Give the responses from his own Attorney General in 1864 regarding Lincoln's Colonization Secretary and Gen. Butler in 1865, the last two years are suspect as well.
The United States National Archives and Records Administration disagrees with you. They have the records of these courts in the National Archives (Record Group 21). See below:
21.2.6 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Middle Division of the District of Alabama
21.2.9 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Southern Division of the District of Alabama
21.11.3 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Northern District of Florida
21.12.4 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Northern Division of the District of Georgia
21.12.9 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Southern Division of the District of Georgia
21.20.5 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the District of Louisiana
21.26.2 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Northern Division of the District of Mississippi
21.35.6 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the District of North Carolina
21.45.5 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Middle Division of the District of Tennessee
21.46.7 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
21.46.10 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Western District of Texas
21.49.6 Records of the Confederate States District Court for the Western District of Virginia
I may have missed some, but the point is made. I hope the source is acceptable to you...
South Carolina ceded the property in 1804 CONDITIONAL that it be improved within 3 years, and fully garrisoned. Failure to do so was grounds for recission. When Sumter was being planned, the state ceded that property in the shoals under the same terms.
But you do have a valid point. The federal government did not possess the sovereign right of eminent domain. The Constitution required that the state cede the property to the federal government, not that the feds could exercise the right of eminent domain; "all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be."
Can't you just feel the love? </sarcasm>
LOL, I guess that's why the SUPREME COURT ruled it UNCONSTITUTIONAL. As to the others you mentioned, do you think the ones that spent the war rotting in jail cells with no charges filed against them agreed with him as well? Can you say "Police State"?
The total amount of duty paid during this forty years [1821-1861] on imposts was $1,191,874,443, of which67.08% to be exact.The South paid,.....................$799,508,378
The North paid,..................... 392,365,065
------------
Difference,.....................$407,144,313
Stephen D. Carpenter, "Mr. Lincoln's Testimony", The Logic of History, Madison, WI: S. D. Carpenter, 1864, p. 21.
Never tired nor convicted. Empty words. But if it was such an open and shut case, the federal government could have easily proven it's case. They did not, and could not. They were scared that Jefferson Davis would be found innocent, legally vindicating the South and condemning the North, Lincoln and the Radical Republicans.
Remember, in the Prize Cases, Justice Grier wrote for the majority:
Several of these States have combined to form a new confederacy, claiming to be acknowledged by the world as a sovereign State. Their right to do so is now being decided by wager of battle.The justices did not state that it was illegal nor unconstitutional.
YES, they did. TWICE. Ex Parte Merryman in 1861, and Ex Parte Milligan in 1866.
...and Copngress specifically suppported the President's action. Remember, Congress was out of session...
When did the Legislative Branch suspend the writ as the Constitution clearly shows only they can?
Morever, the Founding Fathers' Milita Act 0f 1792 authorized the President to put down rebellion without congressional authorization, and rounding up rebels and throwing them in prison is part of putting down rebellions.
He could arrest and charge "rebels" with a crime, couldn't he? But he didn't, did he? He chose instead to violate the Constitution and throw out the Bill of Rights in order to deal with his "problems" using police state tactics against his own citizenry in the North. His suspension of the writ of habeas corpus was illegal, and a blatant violation of the Constitution.
Nah. MLK's politics went too far to the left on too many issues. Though I suppose you believe, at least in your own mind, that this suggestion was to in some way offend the likenesses Jeff Davis et al, I am willing to ignore that for the moment and propose a modification of your suggestion that I would readily endorse. If you desire to propose it I will be among the first to sign your petition.
Here goes: Why not put a likeness of Booker T. Washington on Stone Mountain or in another similar place of veneration in the south? Washington, unlike King, was born a slave and knew exactly what slavery was all about. He knew its hardships, he knew the hardships of the war, he knew the hardships of reconstruction, and he knew the hardships of racial discrimination as he experienced them all in ways that MLK could never have dreamed of.
Yet despite all that, Washington took a higher ground than any other civil rights activist since. He sought recourse from discrimination not by taking revenge upon the people of the past and present, not by offending their memories, and not by pissing on their likenesses as you would suggest, but rather by turning to hard work, Christian morals, a decent education, and a willingness to fight wrong by rising above it. Washington always considered himself a southerner and took great pride in being from our part of the nation. He publicly said so way back in 1896 in the midst of Jim Crow's worst effects. You should follow his lead and try doing some of the same.
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.