Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 4ConservativeJustices
Why did the Confederates states have to be re-admited to the "union" then?

It's been said many times in these threads that this is -not- what happened. The core Republican Party stance throughput the whole war was that the Union was indissoluable. That is why the great mass of loyal volunteers came forward -- to fight for an indissoluable Union.

What was at issue post-war was the seating of congressmen and senators. It was their "readmitance", not the states, that was at issue.

Walt

824 posted on 10/07/2003 5:37:30 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa (Virtue is the uncontested prize.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 762 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
You think it was just their representation in Congress? On 10 Apr 1869 the following was passed:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States, at such time as he may deem best for the public interest, may submit the constitution which was framed by the convention which met in Richmond, Virginia, on Tuesday, the third day of December, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven, to the voters of said State, registered at the date of said submission, for ratification or rejection; ...

Sec. 3 And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States may in like manner submit the constitution of Texas to the voters of said State at such time and in such manner as he may direct, either the entire constitution, or separate provisions of the same ...

Sec. 4 And be it further enacted, That the President of the United States may in like manner resubmit the constitution of Mississippi to the voters of said State at such time and in such manner as he may direct, either the entire constitution, or separate provisions of the same ...

Please oh mystical wizard, point to the section & clause of the Constitution that grants the President and Congress the power to power to propose, amend or submit the constitutions of an existing state, one that was "republican" [representative]? In the debates, Morris asserted that 'a republican government must be the basis of our national union; and no state in it ought to have it in their power to change its government into a monarchy.' The states of Virginia, Texas and Mississippi were not ruled by monarchs - they had just ratified the 13th Amendment, but had failed to ratify the 14th.
Sec. 6 And be it further enacted, That before the States of Virginia, Mississippi, and Texas shall be admitted to representation in Congress, their several legislatures, which may be hereafter lawfully organized, shall ratify the fifteenth article, which has been proposed by Congress to the several States as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Where in the Constitution is the federal government delegated to power to FORCE a state to ratify a pending Amendment as condition of representation? FYI, NO state had ratified the 15th at this time, the first to do so was Nevada, over two months later.

The Wade-Davis bill stated that 'the President of the United States, who, after obtaining the assent of congress, shall, by proclamation, recognize the government so established, and none other, as the constitutional government of the state.'

Secession Acts by the people in Converntion, NO recognized government, NO federal representation, FORCED to rewrite existing state Constitutions - which were good enough to ratify Amendment 13 & reject the 14th, FORCED to ratify amendments - just how is that remaining in the union?

828 posted on 10/07/2003 6:28:30 PM PDT by 4CJ (Come along chihuahua, I want to hear you say yo quiero taco bell. - Nolu Chan, 28 Jul 2003)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 824 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson