Murat
Posts: 803
Joined: 9/17/2003 From: South Carolina Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: jimwinsor Correction: Ft. Sumter was not "empty" when Major Anderson transferred his command in late December 1860; a small party of US engineers was at Sumter busily engaged on construction work since at least October of that year (acting very much like they owned the place, I might add). As for this, you are partially correct, it was not empty, it had construction workers (NOT US engineers) in it who were all evicted when Anderson moved his force into Ft. Sumter. quote:
ORIGINAL: RERomine Agreement with whom, the Secretary of War, John B. Floyd, who ended up being a Confederate general? There is nothing illegal with voiding such an agreement. If such a formal agreement existed, it falls in the realm of civil litigation and not criminal. Actually this would be in the realm of treaties since South Carolina was a sovereign nation. quote:
When and where did a formal hearing take place. When was the United States informed? Who represented them at the hearing? Due process is required. All that was required by international law at the time was a declaration of sovereignity from the former State, which South Carolina issued and delivered to the US Congress by way of the last official act of its representatives to that body. quote:
The agreement, if one existed (I can't find any evidence of such an agreement), would have been portrayed to minimize tension, but more than likely, it was intended to allow South Carolina to take posession without due process and a fight. The only reason Major Robert Anderson was put in command of Ft. Sumter was because he was from Kentucky. It was believed, since he was from a Southern state, that he would just turn everything over if South Carolina asked. If South Carolina felt it had a legal right to the property, why were devious tactics required? Exactly which South Carolinian put Maj. Anderson in charge of Ft. Moultrie, because as I explained before he was not in charge of Ft. Sumter when South Carolina seceeded? If you are claiming that Floyd did this for that purpose, the US Congress aquitted him of any wrong doing in the disposition of forces and commands immediately preceeding the War of Northern Aggression. quote:
None the less, the terminology in the document is such that South Carolina wanted access to anyone hiding from the law within Ft. Sumter. It was not to leave a convenient out form the first part of the statement. In 1836, they weren't looking at it from any other prospective than they wanted protection for the harbor from foreign ships. The law required such fort be on Federal property, owned by the Federal government and not the state. No provision was made for returning such property to a state during secession because no provision was made for secession. The argument for the legality of secession is the absense of explicit prohibitions in the Constitution, i.e. "states may not secede from the Union." The only thing I see explicit is "Resolved, That this state do cede to the United States, all the right, title and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory." South Carolina, by the agreement had legal access to the occupants of said property for civil or criminal litigation. They don't have access to ownership rights of the property itself. It's called eminent domain (legal term, you can go look it up). When South Carolina declared itself a sovereign nation it reclaimed all land owned by the United States withing it's borders, for which the US could have sued to be reimbursed. Instead of following the due process of a sovereign nation, they invaded. quote:
ORIGINAL: Santee Rifleman Further, in 1860, the concept of the right of the People to choose their own Government was a fundamentally American one, no matter what the "legalities" were or are. Otherwise, we'd still be putting English Royal stamps on our transactions and paying taxes to a crowned tyrant. Into the Union the peace-loving citizens of South Carolina came, uncoerced, of their own free will. Out of the Union they went, peacefully and of their own free will. Morally, where is the argument? It took war, invasion, death, desolation, destruction and defeat, occupations and Reconstruction to force them back into same Union, against their will, under a government they did not choose... Dum Spiro Spero... W.G.U. Moultrie. Glad to see another South Carolinian :)
< Message edited by Murat -- 11/28/2006 12:40:11 PM >
|