Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jefferson Davis

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Jefferson Davis

    Having just read William Cooper's biography on Jefferson Davis and about 130 pages into Jefferson Davis' book "The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government" I am really impressed with Davis as a statesmen (I know he has a lot of critics as the "unofficial" Secretary of War for the CSA). I am convinced that the South was right since both slavery and secession were allowed in the Constitution and slavery is allowed in the Bible.

    Is there any pro-Davis people on this forum and if so can you offer some insight or conclusions that you have from your reading and studying Davis that would be helpful to someone just starting to learn about this important historical figure who seems to be overlooked by many?

  • #2
    Where does the US constitution sanction slavery?
    Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
    Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by MarkV View Post
      Where does the US constitution sanction slavery?
      In the same amendment that says that courtroom flags must not have gold fringe. #126, IIRC.
      Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

      Comment


      • #4
        J. DAVIS

        Visit Richmond Va--the Davis home is there and is worth a tour and Hollywood Cemetry were he is buried is worth a look

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by MarkV View Post
          Where does the US constitution sanction slavery?
          Here-
          "No person held to service or labour in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due."

          ...and here-
          "The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."
          {}

          "Any story sounds true until someone tells the other side and sets the record straight." -Proverbs 18:17

          Comment


          • #6
            Where does the Constitution sanction secession?

            It's deja vu all over again,
            "A foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse." Ulysses S. Grant

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by BorderRuffian View Post
              Here-
              "No person held to service or labour in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labour, but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such service or labour may be due."

              ...and here-
              "The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person."
              Total dingos kidneys. A contracted servant or an indentured apprentice may be covered but it does not sanction slavery
              Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
              Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                Total dingos kidneys. A contracted servant or an indentured apprentice may be covered but it does not sanction slavery
                In this world it doesn't-
                {}

                "Any story sounds true until someone tells the other side and sets the record straight." -Proverbs 18:17

                Comment


                • #9
                  Article I, Section 2.

                  Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.
                  Anyone care to guess who those 'three-fifths' persons might be?
                  Don't leave good whiskey for the damn Yankees!" John Hunt Morgan, Eagleport, Ohio, July 23, 1863

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                    Where does the US constitution sanction slavery?
                    Well, the US Constitution as of 1860 clearly permitted slavery because it has special rules for how much of a person slaves count as.
                    It's only post-Fourteenth Amendment that it explicitly condemns slavery.


                    Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.


                    (All free persons or indentured servants are one person, Indians are no person, and others are 3/5ths. This must be slaves.)


                    EDIT: nvm, someone's already pointed it out.



                    As for the secession question, though, the Constitution does not define a way for secession to take place, but nor does it say it is illegal or prohibited. It was not until after the Civil War that the supreme court (surprise, surprise) concluded secession was illegal, and that's pretty blatantly a post-hoc matter. (Heck, it relies on the wording of Texas being admitted into the Union.)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by th_ View Post
                      Having just read William Cooper's biography on Jefferson Davis and about 130 pages into Jefferson Davis' book "The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government" I am really impressed with Davis as a statesmen (I know he has a lot of critics as the "unofficial" Secretary of War for the CSA). I am convinced that the South was right since both slavery and secession were allowed in the Constitution and slavery is allowed in the Bible.

                      Is there any pro-Davis people on this forum and if so can you offer some insight or conclusions that you have from your reading and studying Davis that would be helpful to someone just starting to learn about this important historical figure who seems to be overlooked by many?
                      Im not a fan of Davis because of the way he ran the war but he's growing on me a little. He always seemed to be too little too late when it came to decision making.
                      I do not wish to have the slave emancipated because I love him, but because I hate his master."
                      --Salmon P. Chase

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by th_ View Post
                        I am convinced that the South was right since both slavery and secession were allowed in the Constitution and slavery is allowed in the Bible.
                        Unilateral secession, which the South performed, is not allowed by the Constitution. If this thread does a nosedive over that, I will shut it down.
                        The muffled drums sad roll has beat the soldier's last tatoo. No more on life's parade shall meet that brave and fallen few.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by hellboy30 View Post
                          Unilateral secession, which the South performed, is not allowed by the Constitution. If this thread does a nosedive over that, I will shut it down.
                          I am not sure what you mean by a nosedive but I am quite sure when the 13 colonies separated from England it was a unilateral secession/separation. I assume you would agree.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            No rational person would state slavery is a good thing. Period. I challenge anybody who makes such a claim to volunteer to be one.
                            Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by th_ View Post
                              I am not sure what you mean by a nosedive but I am quite sure when the 13 colonies separated from England it was a unilateral secession/separation. I assume you would agree.
                              The circumstances between the two were completely & utterly different. Apples & oranges. And again, nothing in the Constitution allows for it.
                              The muffled drums sad roll has beat the soldier's last tatoo. No more on life's parade shall meet that brave and fallen few.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X