+- Lincoln Discussion Symposium (https://rogerjnorton.com/LincolnDiscussionSymposium)
+-- Forum: Lincoln Discussion Symposium (/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: Other (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Miscellaneous Questions (/thread-4103.html)
Miscellaneous Questions - DannyW - 07-09-2019 04:48 PM
I have a few unrelated questions . First , I want to thank everyone who responded to my previous post . Got great answers from some very knowledgeable historians- professional or amateur or whatever the case may be.
1. This question was at the end of my previous post & may not have been
seen by all.
Isn’t it true that Andrew Johnson wanted to hang the Rebel leaders
led to friction with Grant . Then after problems with impeachment
& the Radical Republicans over reconstruction he did an about face
& issued his blanket pardon on Christmas Day 1868 to help feelings
in the South & taking a swipe at his enemies.
2. My next question comes after reading an article by Dr Walter E. Willia
Williams on treason . He said if General Lee was a traitor then George
Washington was also. I know the situation was different with us being
a colony of Great Britain & the South trying to become an independent
country . So , how is the constitution to be interpreted pertaining to
secession. Was it fact that the South were traitors & how does a
Person to answer that . Was discussing this with a friend & was the
constitution to be interpreted differently then from now?
Thanks in advance for responses!!!
RE: Miscellaneous Questions - AussieMick - 07-09-2019 06:33 PM
Danny, concerning question 2. (IMO )
There are situations where a governing authority has itself acted in a way contrary to the commonly held views of what is 'good' behaviour.
Of course it is tempting for a powerful minority to assert that those in power have acted contrary to commonly held views of what is 'good' behaviour ... or maybe the basic tenets of their nation.
There have been plenty of instances which (especially with hindsight) we say that 'this' was the right thing to do ... but 'that' was treasonous.
Examples (IMO) ... the 'mutiny' by many Protestant British officers in Northern Ireland when Britain was moving to give independence to Ireland. That (IMO) was treason.
The obverse ... the IRA fighting against the UK? Illegal and criminal acts ,including murder, yes. Treason? IMO... no. But, during WW2, yes if assistance was given to the enemy.
The War of Independence was a fight against oppression and not treason. Could a fair negotiation have resulted without war? No (IMO).
The attempted assassination of Hitler in 1944 was not treason.
The US Civil War (IMO) was an insurrection inspired by leaders acting illegally. Treason? I dont think so ... very difficult especially for an outsider to assess.
RE: Miscellaneous Questions - L Verge - 07-09-2019 08:06 PM
Danny - I'm skipping over #1 because I can't give a good answer yet -- Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction are two of my least favorite (and weakest) topics of the 19th century.
As for #2, I can only suggest that each of us evaluate the following based on our own beliefs and taking into consideration social and political changes over a period of four score and seven years ago. Did these words hold true in 1860? Would they hold true today? P.S. A word of caution; try to remove any thought of slavery while reading these words (and I know we instinctively do it now because of our times). Hopefully, all of us will recognize these words immediately:
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness..."
So, were the men who wrote this insurrectionists, traitors, glory-seekers, or what? How were their beliefs different from those who signed bills of secession in the hard winter of 1860-61? Would you have put your signature to the complete document cited above? What about to bills of secession if in a Southern state? Would you have been Fernando Wood, Mayor of New York, who called for his state to secede from the Union before the late unpleasantness? I think there is a fine line between patriot and traitor, and once again, we must take into account the times in which such decisions are made.
More fuel for the fire: https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/201710/was-secession-legal