Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-25-2014, 11:08 AM
 
14,780 posts, read 43,547,485 times
Reputation: 14621

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
I also noted that the US government didn't not have enough disdain for the Southern leaders to hang them for treason and in fact, pardoned them instead.. I'm just pointing out facts not arguing good or bad either way.
The decision to not pursue the treason charges was based on political need and speeding the beginning of reconstruction. It was not a "lack of disdain" or belief that their crimes were not significant, it was a matter of practicality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
I did not say the Confederate leaders were NOT traitors. geez. You noted the Confederate Heroes were nothing more than traitors and I simply said, so were the Founding Fathers...

Its funny how some can see one side of a coin but not the other.. must be a talent I have yet to perfect.

I have not said a single word about Secession.. not one.
Legal, not legal? Another fools game.
This is what you said...

Quote:
Doesn't that make Washington and all our founding fathers traitors as well?

One of the biggest dilemma's that Confederate bashers have is the direct correlation between the American Revolution and the Civil War. It is hypocritical to say the Confederates were traitors while at the same time giving the founding fathers a pass.

Pot meet kettle.
You said that I was being hypocritical calling the Confederates traitors while apparently "giving the Founding Fathers a pass". Ergo, you implied that the Confederates were not traitors and were like the Founding Fathers. The details have been argued out over the posts that followed.

I think one of the best points was made by Unsettomati. The Founding Fathers fought for the United States. The Confederates fought against the United States. Major distinction, at least if you are an American.

The "Southern Fascination" with the Confederacy really is silly if you think about it. Let's honor the memory of people who engaged in open rebellion against the freely and legitimately elected government of the United States. The main reason for their rebellion? So, that they could protect their interests in "owning" 3.5 million human beings. The result? Bringing untold destruction to the nation and in particular their homes. Then they followed that up with decades of laws designed to maintain a quasi form of slavery over those same 3.5 million human beings and their descendants. Yes, let's all gather 'round and fondly remember that...

 
Old 11-25-2014, 11:25 AM
 
8,377 posts, read 7,335,855 times
Reputation: 8691
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
Correct on all points.

I wasn't pointing out the 'pardon thing' as a way of justifying seccession. I have never tried to justify it nor would I. It's a Fools game either way. It was pointed out that Confederate Heroes were nothing more than traitors.. so I pointed out that the Founding Fathers were as well.
One pertinent difference between the Confederate 'Heroes' and the Founding Fathers - the Founding Fathers won.

We could also digress into how the attempts by the Southern slave power to maintain their grip on a national government (any national government, Federal or Confederate) is in no way comparable to the social and political changes that were the American Revolution. Anyone who attempts to equate the Southern slave power to the Founding Fathers is either misinformed or disingenuous.

Quote:
I also noted that the US government didn't not have enough disdain for the Southern leaders to hang them for treason and in fact, pardoned them instead.. I'm just pointing out facts not arguing good or bad either way.
Sort of slid right by the explanation I provided about why Southern leaders weren't executed for treason, didn't you?

I ask again - what twelve men in the state of Virginia would have voted as a jury to convict Robert E Lee of anything, let alone treason?
 
Old 11-25-2014, 11:32 AM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 24,014,227 times
Reputation: 21237
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
I ask again - what twelve men in the state of Virginia would have voted as a jury to convict Robert E Lee of anything, let alone treason?
A trial for treason against the Federal government would have been conducted in a Federal court, not a state court in Virginia.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 12:53 PM
 
8,377 posts, read 7,335,855 times
Reputation: 8691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
A trial for treason against the Federal government would have been conducted in a Federal court, not a state court in Virginia.
The question about trials for treason had been raised before in this forum. At that time, I wondered why Jefferson Davis never stood trial for treason. My quick researching (ok, my quick googling) led me to several articles that indicated that Salmon P Chase, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War, discussed the possibility of trying Davis for treason. According to the internet info, Chase pointed out, much to Stanton's disappointment, that any treason trial of Jefferson Davis would have to take place in Virginia and that it would have to be a jury trial.

Now that you've raised the point that any such trial would take place in a Federal court, it would be a good time for me to review whether what I found was actually truthful.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 01:08 PM
 
14,780 posts, read 43,547,485 times
Reputation: 14621
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
The question about trials for treason had been raised before in this forum. At that time, I wondered why Jefferson Davis never stood trial for treason. My quick researching (ok, my quick googling) led me to several articles that indicated that Salmon P Chase, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War, discussed the possibility of trying Davis for treason. According to the internet info, Chase pointed out, much to Stanton's disappointment, that any treason trial of Jefferson Davis would have to take place in Virginia and that it would have to be a jury trial.

Now that you've raised the point that any such trial would take place in a Federal court, it would be a good time for me to review whether what I found was actually truthful.
That was my understanding as well. It would be tried in a Federal Court in Virginia. Of course, that meant that the required jury would be drawn from Virginia as well.

There were other hurdles of course, not the least of which was the lack of political will for a major trial. If Davis was not guilty, what did we fight for? If he was guilty than he would be martyred and the fragile peace and beginning of Reconstruction would be damaged. At the end of the day, the war itself settled the legal questions.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 01:16 PM
 
8,377 posts, read 7,335,855 times
Reputation: 8691
According to this site https://jeffersondavis.rice.edu/FAQs.aspx, the federal government did try to bring Jefferson Davis to trial in a federal civil court in Virginia on the charge of treason.

Rather than copy and paste, I recommend reading the section 'The Case Against Jefferson Davis'.

One pertinent passage that I would point out:

Quote:
(President Andrew) Johnson began to fear that if Davis were tried and acquitted--a very real possibility with a Virginia jury--he (Johnson) would be impeached again and removed from office.
So Davis was eventually about to be tried for treason in Virginia, in a federal civil court with a jury comprised of Virginians.

Reading towards the end, the prosecution dropped the charges for reasons having to do with Chief Justice Salmon P Chase's opinion in a split judicial ruling during the trial that the 14th Amendment exempted Davis from further prosecution.

So I don't know that Stanton and Chase (both lawyers by trade) had any discussion in 1865 regarding treason trials, but it appears that the historical record shows that at least one treason trial eventually went forward, but with a Virginian jury in a civil case.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 24,014,227 times
Reputation: 21237
djmilf & Goat:

A trial by a Federal Court in Virginia would not have been possible until the 1870's. Before then Virginia was not a state in the Union, it was Military District # 1, one of the five into which the former Confederacy was divided by the Radical Republicans in Congress.

Horace Blois Burnham, an army officer, was the chief judge advocate for Military District # 1 and would have had jurisdiction over any regional treason trials during this time. These would have been military courts, not civilian ones, thus there would have been no jurors, rather it would have featured a panel of military officers.

I'll guess that none of those military officers would have been Virginians, unless maybe it was loyalist Pap Thomas.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 01:45 PM
 
8,377 posts, read 7,335,855 times
Reputation: 8691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
djmilf & Goat:

A trial by a Federal Court in Virginia would not have been possible until the 1870's. Before then Virginia was not a state in the Union, it was Military District # 1, one of the five into which the former Confederacy was divided by the Radical Republicans in Congress.
You're correct, the state of Virginia had not been readmitted to the Union, but this was a federal trial. I don't believe that a state government was required for a federal trial to proceed.

This link Guide to the Jefferson Davis Trial Papers MS 979 1865-1868, from the University of Chicago Library, contains the following passage:

Quote:
The three earliest letters, dating from October 1866 to May 1867, concern the transfer of Davis from military to civil imprisonment so that he might be brought ot trial in the Virginia Circuit Court.
I'd like to point out that this further substantiates the point that Davis had been transferred from military to civil jurisdiction.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 01:51 PM
 
14,780 posts, read 43,547,485 times
Reputation: 14621
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
You're correct, the state of Virginia had not been readmitted to the Union, but this was a federal trial. I don't believe that a state government was required for a federal trial to proceed.

This link Guide to the Jefferson Davis Trial Papers MS 979 1865-1868, from the University of Chicago Library, contains the following passage:

I'd like to point out that this further substantiates the point that Davis had been transferred from military to civil jurisdiction.
Hard to argue with primary source GS...

We all know there wasn't a trial and there were various reasons for that. However, the fact that the trial would have apparently been in "Virginia" did weigh on the minds of those debating such a trial. I'm not too deeply versed in all of this, so GS could very well be right, but had read about the "Virginia issue" with a trial in the past.
 
Old 11-25-2014, 02:06 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 24,014,227 times
Reputation: 21237
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT View Post
Hard to argue with primary source GS...

We all know there wasn't a trial and there were various reasons for that. However, the fact that the trial would have apparently been in "Virginia" did weigh on the minds of those debating such a trial. I'm not too deeply versed in all of this, so GS could very well be right, but had read about the "Virginia issue" with a trial in the past.
Even if the Federal Court structure had been in place, why would a treason trial for either Davis or Lee have to have taken place in Virginia?

Their "crimes" were against the Federal government, not just the Virginian portion of the Federal government. Davis was from Mississippi, took office as president of the states in rebellion in Montgomery, Alabama, and traveled to most of the Confederate states during the course of the war.

Lee served as a rebel military officer in Virginia, South Carolina, Georgia, Maryland and Pennsylvania. He led troops from all eleven rebel states.

Seems to me that the US was free to try both men in whichever Federal district it wanted, there is nothing in the Constitution concerning the restriction of venues among Federal Courts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:38 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top