GDG- Re: a grave question to be considered

[Margaret D. Blough]

> Treason  and secession are two completely different things - and a topic that a former 
> constitutional law professor and I broached this past weekend at the CW 
> conference in Decatur, IL who stating the same thing as I am here. It was not 
> the 
> South's aim to overthrow the US government - it was their aim to leave it, 
> thus not committing treason.

I've always regarded this as a false distinction. The rebels were out to overthrow the United States government in a considerable portion of the land over which it had sovereignty.  They certainly regarded the attempts by East Tennessee to stay with the Union as treasonous and the East Tennesseans were certainly not trying to take over the government of the Confederacy in any other area or in Richmond. The Founding Fathers were under no illusion of how the Crown viewed their actions, even though George III remained secure on his throne and His Majesty's Government remained in control everywhere else in the UK and its possessions even after they succeeded, and the fate that they would have met if they failed.

As for treason, Floyd, in particular, took his most suspect actions when he was still US Secretary of War, having sworn an oath to protect and defend the constitution of the United States.  Treason, under the United States constitution, is very difficult to prove.  In any event, treason trials not only would have raised the issue of where to hold them and the risk of jury nullication (a jury verdict that rejects the law and votes on its beliefs of what's right or wrong) but would have been very destructive to efforts to restore national unity.  Lincoln, in his Second Inaugural showed no desire for that kind of vengeance and, IIRR, in private made it clear that he would not object if certain leading Confederates managed to leave the country as the Confederacy fell.  Eventually, the issue of how to deal with the former Confederate leaders was dealt with by pardon (which is not needed if no crime was involved) and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Regards,

Margaret



-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: Biggsk at aol.com 

> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes: 
> 
> 
> 
> Laurie Schiller writes: 
> 
> >>>Ok - I wasn't going to get into this, but while Grant let corrupt friends 
> loot the treasury, Buchanan damaged the country by not doing anything while 
> the country drifted to war. He let his southern cabinet officers ship weapons 
> and supplies to the south and do a variety of other treasonous things.>>> 
> 
> 
> Theft of Federal property at best. Treasonous? Not even close. Treason 
> and secession are two completely different things - and a topic that a former 
> constitutional law professor and I broached this past weekend at the CW 
> conference in Decatur, IL who stating the same thing as I am here. It was not 
> the 
> South's aim to overthrow the US government - it was their aim to leave it, 
> thus not committing treason. The proof in the pudding is that there were no 
> trials for treason after the war - and Jeff Davis and Alec Stephens were both 
> chomping at the bit for them to prove their point. 
> 
> They probably would have won - and the US government knew it! 
> 
> Greg Biggs 
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------- 
> You may unsubscribe by going to 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg 
> 
> You can add yourself to the GDG map at: 
> http://www.frappr.com/gettysburgdiscussiongroup 
> 
> View archived posts from May 2004 - present at 
> http://mailman.arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg/