Page 10 of 13 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 125

Thread: Causes of the Civil War

  1. #91

    CSA Major

    Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Baldwin,Louisiana
    Posts
    1,723
    Quote Originally Posted by yoyo8346 View Post
    I mean, I guess it's kind of up to interpretation for which side technically "declared" war, but the way I see it, the Confederacy declared a war of independence. You can't just up and take land away from another country. They were expecting a fight out of it.

    It's kind of like if New Orleans seceded and declared independence from Louisiana. There would be a war over it.
    That's different though imo as New Orleans is just a city and doesn't have any real government. States however do have their own governments with their own constitution and laws. It was perfectly legal for the south to succeed.
    Jesse S. Crosby, 20th Georgia Infantry, July 15, 1861 - May 6, 1864

    Samuel T. McKenzie, 20th Georgia Infantry, July 15, 1861 - September 2, 1862

    Joseph C. McKenzie, 20th Georgia Infantry, July 15, 1861 - October 1, 1863

    Henry C. McKenzie, 3rd Georgia Infantry, June 1, 1861 - January 28, 1863

    Charles R. Beddingfield, 38th Alabama Infantry

    Samuel L. Cowart, Cobb's Legion

  2. #92

    CSA Lieutenant General

    dmurray6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Eldersburg, MD
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by yoyo8346 View Post
    I mean, I guess it's kind of up to interpretation for which side technically "declared" war, but the way I see it, the Confederacy declared a war of independence. You can't just up and take land away from another country. They were expecting a fight out of it.

    It's kind of like if New Orleans seceded and declared independence from Louisiana. There would be a war over it.
    Yoyo, what you're describing is also a topic that's been discussed/debated in the forum, concerning the creation of West Virginia and other states. According to Article 4, Section 3, of the the Constitution, it was an unconstitutional act, even in the 1860's, if done so unilaterally. However, though the Supreme Court ruled against Texas in an 1869 ruling, that ruling is, well, from 1869. West Virginia had already done it's dirty deed, and the Civil War had already run its course.

    Article 4, Section 3 of the Constitution:
    New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
    Here's a link for an article that was written back in 1969 on the very topic, enjoy, and form your own opinion. I'm sure other research on the topic would also prove worthy.

    Statehood for West Virginia: An Illegal Act?
    Civil War Ancestors:

  3. #93

    CSA Captain

    yoyo8346's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    420
    Quote Originally Posted by dmurray6 View Post
    Yoyo, what you're describing is also a topic that's been discussed/debated in the forum
    I'm not debating the legality of it, I just made up an example for my conversation with Legion. Dropping out before we get off topic.

  4. #94
    FrancisM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of the Netherlands
    Posts
    114
    It was perfectly legal for the south to succeed.
    No, it wasn't. The constitution is silent on the matter meaning the legality of such an action is by precedent and judicial review. Had the Federal government accepted secession, it would have become, by precedent, legal. Obviously it didn't; it fought a war and it won, setting the precedent that secession is illegal. Of course, that precedent lasted only three years because Texas v. White made secession illegal by jurisprudence. Until legally challenged, secession is and was illegal in 1860.

    So who declared war? Nobody did, because, legally, there wasn't one. Wars can only be declared by souvereign states, which the United States didn't need to do because it was facing an insurrection. It was legally entitled to use any and all force to bring rebellious areas back under its control.

    As for slavery, I think that too often people feel that saying it caused secession means saying all who fought for the confederacy fought for slavery, which obviously is not the case. That being said, slavery and the economic situation of the south that was depended on it was the main reason for decisionmakers (state governors, politicians, party leaders and the local elites) to support secession.

  5. #95
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    22
    Some were a little ambivalent on my topic of interest here, the established Anglican/ Episcopal, and Presbyterian religions, so I wanted to give hard evidence citation. This is Wikipedia for Demopolis Alabama: Despite some bright spots in relations, the Episcopal Church in the South was slow to give up on the notion of the Confederacy, resulting in the military governor of Alabama closing all Episcopal churches in the state, effective on September 20, 1865. Trinity Episcopal Church in Demopolis was put under Federal guard, and during this time the church mysteriously burned down. Blame was placed on the soldiers for intentionally burning it, but this has never been born out by the facts.
    The county appointed Richard Jones, Jr., Lewis B. McCarty, and Dr. Bryan W. Whitfield to build or buy a new courthouse in Demopolis. They negotiated the purchase of the Presbyterian church on the town square, now known as Rooster Hall, for the sum of $3000. It was conveyed to the county on April 8, 1869. The county built a fireproof brick building next door to the former church in 1869–70 to house the probate and circuit clerk offices. This building serves as Demopolis City Hall today.

    At that point you need to take any flat Objections on my topics up with bland Wikipedia citation makers. "The people's city : the glory and grief of an Alabama town, 1850-1874" Smith, Winston

    this whole topic doesn't reach the American Civil War Wikipedia, looks like. In an exclusive sort of way.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQHp_o2TepY
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgveW_2EHVE
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML8H8ve4EsM
    Last edited by KoreanPCA; 06-27-2017 at 05:04 PM.

  6. #96

    CSA Lieutenant General

    dmurray6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Eldersburg, MD
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by yoyo8346 View Post
    I'm not debating the legality of it, I just made up an example for my conversation with Legion. Dropping out before we get off topic.
    Fair enough. I wasn't suggesting that you were debating its legality. I was just pointing out the fact that the example you had derived did in fact happen. The counties of Virginia that eventually became West Virginia would be represented by your New Orleans example to Louisiana. Just provided the other stuff for the sake of it, in case you were interested in reading about the situation. It was definitely a weird situation.
    Last edited by dmurray6; 06-27-2017 at 04:32 PM.
    Civil War Ancestors:

  7. #97
    FrancisM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of the Netherlands
    Posts
    114
    A movement for separate statehood had grown in the trans-Allegheny region of Virginia long before the outbreak of war. A key obstacle to separate admission to the Union was that the United States Constitution forbade the creation of new states out of existing ones without the consent of the existing state's legislature. Soon after the president and Congress recognized the Restored Government as the legitimate government of Virginia, it asserted its authority to give such consent.
    A bit of a run-around-way to do it, but nevertheless legally sound.

  8. #98

    CSA Lieutenant General

    dmurray6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Eldersburg, MD
    Posts
    368
    Quote Originally Posted by FrancisM View Post
    A bit of a run-around-way to do it, but nevertheless legally sound.
    As Yoyo stated, we did get a bit off topic with this. I'm not sure I would consider it legally sound. It's more like a situation where it was recognized because it would benefit their agenda. Recognizing a "restored government" is just another way of saying we're going to recognize those that remain loyal to us. What the counties that became West Virginia did, was to conduct a unilateral vote to remain loyal to the Union. That does not make them a separate entity from the state of Virginia. That vote did not include votes from all the other counties of Virginia, whether they were represented by those that wished to secede or not. Far from legally sound.
    Civil War Ancestors:

  9. #99
    FrancisM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of the Netherlands
    Posts
    114
    But those other counties had no legal right to secede and thus were insurrectionists. The West Virginian statehood was accepted by what remained of the Virginian government - the parts that were not insurrectionists.

  10. #100

    USA General of the Army

    A. P. Hill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    In Maryland State Near to both Antietam and Gettysburg, Harper's Ferry et al.
    Posts
    3,390
    Save your Dixie Cups Boys, the South will rise again!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •