e first president to own slaves, including while he was president."
Slavery was legal at the time of voluntary membership in a regional
unified political governing body for Defense, Commerce, Trade, Courts,
eventually a National Monetary System, although the idea of a National
Central Bank was anathema for many years.
Andrew Jackson, the first dynamic President, despised the very thought of
a National Central Bank in New York or even Washington. Except for the
National Bank he was a very forceful advocate for national allegiance,
acquiescence, and cooperation. He was quite domineering as President. Some
scholars claim Lincoln was not a fan, but emulated his Presidency of force
over reason. The enduring question for legal historians is why did
neither Lincoln, a former lawyer, or Davis, a former Senator, make use of
the Supreme Court to adjudicate this constitutional dispute?
Both Davis and Lincoln were "My Way or Highway" Presidents and even more
perilous both men had a messiah complex. Ironically modern legal scholars
have confirmed yes Davis was correct as to Constitutional Law based on
precedent of The Declaration of Independence and the factual history the
larger States kept subdividing with peaceful negotiations and commonsense.
The Revolutionary War was the most conspicuous precedent in freedom from
overt domination and the Supreme Court was the obvious venue for
resolution to this historic conflict. As a practicing attorney now become
President why did Lincoln not instinctively resort to the Highest Court?
Post by Anthony Marsh Post by claviger Post by Anthony Marsh Post by Anthony Marsh
Treason. The colonies did not secede from the United States. The
republic of the United States did not yet exist. We were only colonies
of a monarchy and we rebelled to gain our freedom.
It was basically a Tax Revolt. The US Congress is our new King George III
Post by Anthony Marsh Post by Anthony Marsh Post by BT George
I am very glad at the end results. (Slavery done away
with, and the Union
Post by BT George
staying together. But I think it is truly difficult to say
the South was wrong on point of legal Constitutional
principal as it then existed, even if I think their primary
reason for secession was reprehensible.
So you are a proud confederate.
Robert E Lee wrote ???the maintenance of the rights and
authority reserved to the states and to the people, not
only essential to the adjustment and balance of the
general system, but the safeguard to the continuance
of a free government."
So, like Trump you praise a traitor.
In a voluntary association of States, highest duty and primary
loyalty is to the Home State first, which is entirely logical and
normal because that is where all your family and friends live.
Any other loyalty would be unnatural. One of the most famous
Confederate Generals came from a Virginia family opposed to
slavery who were outspoken against it. When the call to arms
spread across Virginia to resist invasion, he reported for duty
to protect friends and family.
This is normal human behavior. A surprising number of people
in the North were sympathetic to Southern grievances and the
right of any State to act in their own best interest. Actually the
Taxation complaints preceded the slavery issue as a reason for
concern and why there was friction with President Jackson, a
southern slave owner.
Two arrogant politicians started this tragic war, against the
temperate advice and sage wisdom by concerned advisors,
and ignoring the quintessence of Democracy. Both did pay
a grievous high price for such arrogance. More Americans
suffered and died because of this political blunder than any
war in US history.
So you are in favor of no Civil War and keeping slavery.
That explains a lot.
I despise Slavery: Black Slavery and Native American Slavery.
Your ancestors in New England were involved with BOTH.
Every Colony and State (but Vermont) were involved in Black
Slavery and some historians might say White Slavery too.
Native Americans were the First slaves, the Most slaves, and
the Last slaves in North America. It is extreme hypocrisy for
anyone to feign concern over Slavery and ignore Amerindian
Slavery like it never happened.
President Andrew Jackson personally owned Black Slaves and
proceeded to enslave the Native Tribes of the Southeast region
and moved them on a death march "Trail of Tears" to Oklahoma.
When Lincoln became President he approved the same harsh
treatment of Minnesota Native Americans.
Minnesota is a Native American name. Now it is known for
Nordic Americans who took their place.
The only difference, Jackson did not hang any Native American
leaders in a public execution like Lincoln did, and Lincoln made
no attempt to free Native American slaves as a group. The fact
Native Americans were starving on reservations during the deep
freeze winter months was no concern to the Great Emancipator.
The only Freedom they ever got from him was death.
At least Slaves were fed, clothed, and sheltered on Plantations.
Not on Native Reservations which were basically concentration
camps. Read some real History Books.
As for the Law in the British Colonies and after the Revolution,
Slavery was a legal institution North and South. As mentioned,
the North decided to do away with Black slavery, most did not
free any slaves, instead sold them to the Southern plantations.
Once they got all their purchase money back then they could
denounce Slavery. Lucky for them Lincoln had not yet signed
the Emancipation Proclamation.
If all this stinks of hypocrisy, your nostrils are working correctly.
Therefore the basic sense of separation was already established,
slavery no longer legal above the line of separation but continued
as a Constitutional institution south of the line. This was a perfect
time to accept a Missouri Compromise and save lives.
Ironically, the Missouri people were a Native American Tribe too.
There are Civil, State, and Federal Laws many people don't like, but
as citizens we are expected to obey them. Nothing changed in the
South from Day 1 of the Constitution and they kept operating under
Federal Law. If there is a legal challenge to any Federal Law it must
be adjudicated by the Supreme Court. The correct venue where this
Constitutional conflict should have been sorted out, not on bloody
battlefields. That is what a Great Nation would do.
I consider Davis and Lincoln equally to blame for the carnage.
" Roughly 1,264,000 American soldiers have died in the nation's wars--
620,000 in the Civil War and 644,000 in all other conflicts."
This number does not include civilian deaths.
Instead of behaving like great American Leaders, Davis and Lincoln
acted like two Banana Republic caudillos shooting it out. Given the
soaring language of the Declaration of Independence the Civil War
was gross hypocrisy.
Shame on Davis and Lincoln for ignoring commonsense, The Bible,
and the US Constitution.