View single post by HankC
 Posted: Fri Jul 7th, 2006 02:11 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top

Shadowrebel wrote:Oh, please...If you are merely going to cut and paste from LewRockwell.com, I can just read it there, if I were so inclined...HankC,

Thank you for your reply. So you are telling me that the Freedmen, as you call them, had it better during Reconstruction? That their plight only got worse after Reconstruction? It got no worse after Reconstruction then it was during Reconstruction, that is the Yankee myth. The Yankees never improved the plight of the former slaves. It was not until the 1960s that the Negro began to get his due and today have not fully been given their due.

As to Lincoln, or Honest Abe as Northerners like to call him;

Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus despite a ruling from Hon. Roger B. Taney, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States that he did it illegally.

 

When Maryland voiced its support for the CSA and appeared itself ready to secede, Lincoln arrested 31 Maryland legislators, the mayor of Baltimore (the nation’s 3rd largest city at the time), and a US Congressman from Maryland, as well as numerous editors and publishers. As noted Lincoln scholar Mark Neely writes in The Last Best Hope of Earth, Lincoln arrested the Marylanders "without much agonizing over their constitutionality" (p 133).

 

Not only did Lincoln imprison two US Congressmen, he also wrote out an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, Roger Taney, after Taney wrote the opinion in Ex Parte Merryman (1861) rebuking Lincoln’s illegitimate suspension of habeas corpus (see Charles Adams, p 46-53).

 

John Marshall, whose opinion in Marbury v. Madison (1803) famously declared that "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is," also wrote the  opinion in Ex Parte Bollman and Swartwout (1807) declaring that suspension of habeas corpus was a power vested only in the Congress. Lincoln simply ignored the law.

 

The Great Emancipator never freed any slaves, the greatest of Yankee myths. It took the 13th Amendment to the Constitution to do that. I do believe Lincoln was dead by that time. He proposed three 13th amendments to the Constitution; Lincoln's Three Proposed Constitutional Amendments of 1862

1.  Federal compensation provided for states agreeing to abolish slavery by January 1, 1900.
2.  Frees slaves who "enjoyed actual freedom by the chances of war" before "the end of the rebellion."
3.  Congress authorized to provide for colonization outside of
the United States of free blacks by their own consent.


He really was a friend of the slaves with these proposals. Abolish slavery by Jan. 1, 1900 how can you call him a friend of the slaves? http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/thirteenthamendment.html

So much for Honest Abe, the Great Emancipator.

  The war was from the Union side about preserving the Union; I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln/speeches/greeley.htm



   The South fought for States Rights, here is a website with all 13 Declaration of Secession which clearly show the South fought for States rights. http://www.civil-war.net/pages/ordinances_secession.asp


   The North denied the South of its' right to regain its' property.
How did the North do that?
     Have you ever heard of the Underground Railroad? Also see the Declaration of Secession for more details.

   You deny that Grant and his wife owned slaves during the war and only freed them after the passage of the 13th Amendment or that General Lee was a slave holder at the time of Appomattox? Grant certainly had some control over and use of slaves his father-in-law gave his wife.(Simon, p347) Lee had freed his slaves in 1862.

I await your reply and souces of you reply.

Shadowrebel (John)

 Close Window