The Origins and Causes of the U.S. Civil War

[Discombobulated]

A

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

gain, the U.s was not granted the right to invade South Carolina waters to supply the fort. That was an act of war when the U.s entered SC waters.

 

[James Everett]

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

Well, Paperview, where did you go? Got your ass handed to you again didn't you? While the land was ceded to the U.S. It became useless to the U.S. As a fort when South Carolina legally seceded. There was no purpose for the U.S. To maintain the fort other than a provocation of war. The U.S. Lost access to it upon SC secession. The only way to supply or maintain any of those forts was through the consent of the States wherein they were surrounded. To do so required consent, and without consent any. Attempt to supply troops would mean an invasion through the sovereign States land or waters wherein the Fort rested? Hence an act of war on the part of the U.S. As I have stated, you must return to the first cause. Everything rests on the legality of secession. Cite the law that makes secession an illegal or unlawful act. And stop acting as a child with you vulgar and petty insults, they don't help your case and show you for the childish kilobytes or girl that you are.

 

[Discombobulated]

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

Well, Paperview, where did you go? Got your ass handed to you again didn't you? While the land was ceded to the U.S. It became useless to the U.S. As a fort when South Carolina legally seceded. There was no purpose for the U.S. To maintain the fort other than a provocation of war. The U.S. Lost access to it upon SC secession. The only way to supply or maintain any of those forts was through the consent of the States wherein they were surrounded. To do so required consent, and without consent any. Attempt to supply troops would mean an invasion through the sovereign States land or waters wherein the Fort rested? Hence an act of war on the part of the U.S. As I have stated, you must return to the first cause. Everything rests on the legality of secession. Cite the law that makes secession an illegal or unlawful act. And stop acting as a child with you vulgar and petty insults, they don't help your case and show you for the childish kilobytes or girl that you are.

 

[Discombobulated]

Maybe if he repeats it again it will make more sense.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A

The South seceded months before Lincoln was inaugurated.

The South was not coming back peacefully.

The South did not respect constitutional, electoral process.

The South fired on Old Glory.

Yep, Lincoln was at fault.

gain Jake ole boy please explain the cinstitutional process that the South did not follow.

The did not accept the constitutional, electoral process that made Lincoln president.

That refusal to accept constitutional process and out right violent insurrection led to the law execution of the Old South. The CSA was a murder regime and was dealt with lawfully; it was killed.

 

[JakeStarkey]

....

Slavery was a dying practice. The industrial revolution was beginning....

Idiot doesn't even know the basics of history.

The Industrial Revolution in America as not "just beginning" in 1860, and with

To all you Yankee's Your deadline is 9pm tonight. You are running out of time!
WE STILL AWAIT YOUR POSTING OF THE
participating States of the CSA can gather and discuss what is going on with their respective States and what is and is not working to educate the general public on our Movement for self Government
Nov 8


Article within YOUR 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution, or Amendment thereof that states that secession is unlawful or illegal.

And what are you going to do then?

Break loose from the insane asylum you're in and screech cross the underpass onto the highway
in your johnny reb grays holding the stars and bars in one hand, pounding out Dixie on your bugle in the other and yelping how


the time has come !1!! the south will rise again!!!!

You Yankees have pushed us kinfed-retts long enough!!!!!





<Here's a lil tip: wear a double set of Depends.>

More childishness from the lil boy Paperview stomping his foot because he's made a fool of himself, so why not continue? I gave you Yankees one week to cite the
Article within YOUR 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution, or Amendment thereof that states that secession is unlawful or illegal. That is plenty of time for even the pseudo intellectual such as your lil group. You have been unable therefore at that point you have clearly lost this debate. Nothing other than the legality of secession is relevant. You can scream slavery all you like but that is of no consequence comming from those who support the government that was responsible for the extermination of the Native American Indian. You lose on both the moral and legal issue as the hypocrites that you are.

One, like the South, you have no authority to require anyone to do anything because you are surely not an expert or judge on these matters.

Two, you have not given any convincing constitutional reason permitting the South to secede.

You precede and fail from confirmation bias.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

gain, the U.s was not granted the right to invade South Carolina waters to supply the fort. That was an act of war when the U.s entered SC waters.

An inferior government may not dictate to a superior government. Your argument fails morally, philosophically, and legally.

The act of war occurred when the CSA attacked federal forces.

 

[James Everett]

A

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

gain, the U.s was not granted the right to invade South Carolina waters to supply the fort. That was an act of war when the U.s entered SC waters.

An inferior government may not dictate to a superior government. Your argument fails morally, philosophically, and legally.

The act of war occurred when the CSA attacked federal forces.

A

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

gain, the U.s was not granted the right to invade South Carolina waters to supply the fort. That was an act of war when the U.s entered SC waters.

An inferior government may not dictate to a superior government. Your argument fails morally, philosophically, and legally.

The act of war occurred when the CSA attacked federal forces.

jake, I am so proud if you!!! You are learning. You are 100%correct inferiors do not dictate to superiors! The States dictated what few powers that the central body would hold. The States via their delegates established/dictated what powers the central body would hold. Therefore the State governments are the superiors. Good gor you, your learning which is more than I can say for Paperview.

 

[James Everett]

....

Slavery was a dying practice. The industrial revolution was beginning....

Idiot doesn't even know the basics of history.

The Industrial Revolution in America as not "just beginning" in 1860, and with

To all you Yankee's Your deadline is 9pm tonight. You are running out of time!
WE STILL AWAIT YOUR POSTING OF THE
participating States of the CSA can gather and discuss what is going on with their respective States and what is and is not working to educate the general public on our Movement for self Government
Nov 8


Article within YOUR 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution, or Amendment thereof that states that secession is unlawful or illegal.

And what are you going to do then?

Break loose from the insane asylum you're in and screech cross the underpass onto the highway
in your johnny reb grays holding the stars and bars in one hand, pounding out Dixie on your bugle in the other and yelping how


the time has come !1!! the south will rise again!!!!

You Yankees have pushed us kinfed-retts long enough!!!!!





<Here's a lil tip: wear a double set of Depends.>

More childishness from the lil boy Paperview stomping his foot because he's made a fool of himself, so why not continue? I gave you Yankees one week to cite the
Article within YOUR 1787/1789 U.S. CONstitution, or Amendment thereof that states that secession is unlawful or illegal. That is plenty of time for even the pseudo intellectual such as your lil group. You have been unable therefore at that point you have clearly lost this debate. Nothing other than the legality of secession is relevant. You can scream slavery all you like but that is of no consequence comming from those who support the government that was responsible for the extermination of the Native American Indian. You lose on both the moral and legal issue as the hypocrites that you are.

One, like the South, you have no authority to require anyone to do anything because you are surely not an expert or judge on these matters.

Two, you have not given any convincing constitutional reason permitting the South to secede.

You precede and fail from confirmation bias.

Oh, jake did you miss it? I gave you the tenth amendment which clearly gives "the south the authority to leave.

 

[Discombobulated]

A

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

gain, the U.s was not granted the right to invade South Carolina waters to supply the fort. That was an act of war when the U.s entered SC waters.

An inferior government may not dictate to a superior government. Your argument fails morally, philosophically, and legally.

The act of war occurred when the CSA attacked federal forces.

A

The South committed an Act of War with the firing on and seizing of Federal property.

And Buchanan was a pansy ass to not fulfill his duties when the South took claim to property that WAS NOT THEIRS.

But for those who might be interested in the historical tidbit (not for James, he's a Lost Cause troll with a serious mental illness...)

Here you go:
=================================================
South Carolina ceded all rights and claim to Sumter in 1836. Yes, 1836.
==================================================

Committee on Federal Relations
In the House of Representatives, December 31st, 1836

"The Committee on Federal relations, to which was referred the Governor's message, relating to the site of Fort Sumter, in the harbour of Charleston, and the report of the Committee on Federal Relations from the Senate on the same subject, beg leave to Report by Resolution:

"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, Provided, That all processes, civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State, or any officer thereof, shall and may be served and executed upon the same, and any person there being who may be implicated by law; and that the said land, site and structures enumerated, shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this state.

"Also resolved: That the State shall extinguish the claim, if any valid claim there be, of any individuals under the authority of this State, to the land hereby ceded.

"Also resolved, That the Attorney-General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm. Laval and others to the site of Fort Sumter, and adjacent land contiguous thereto; and if he shall be of the opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land, that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James L. Pringle, Thomas Bennett and Ker. Boyce, Esquires, be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State, to appraise the value thereof. If the Attorney-General should be of the opinion that the said title is not legal and valid, that he proceed by seire facius of other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided; and that the Attorney-General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session.

"Resolved, That this House to agree. Ordered that it be sent to the Senate for concurrence. By order of the House:

"T. W. Glover, C. H. R."
"In Senate, December 21st, 1836

"Resolved, that the Senate do concur. Ordered that it be returned to the House of Representatives, By order:

Jacob Warly, C. S.

======================================
And even if she hadn't, a state cannot just claim Federal property as it's own. Kentucky can't just decide to claim Fort Knox if it decided it wanted to secede. Not the way it works.

But never matter no mind. South Carolina DID cede the rights to Fort Sumter and adjacent territory. It's right there in black and black and white.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Poor lil white supremacists who can't get over, still -- they lost the war.

gain, the U.s was not granted the right to invade South Carolina waters to supply the fort. That was an act of war when the U.s entered SC waters.

An inferior government may not dictate to a superior government. Your argument fails morally, philosophically, and legally.

The act of war occurred when the CSA attacked federal forces.

jake, I am so proud if you!!! You are learning. You are 100%correct inferiors do not dictate to superiors! The States dictated what few powers that the central body would hold. The States via their delegates established/dictated what powers the central body would hold. Therefore the State governments are the superiors. Good gor you, your learning which is more than I can say for Paperview.

 

[paperview]

Rogue -- I am so sorry your very well presented OP has been trashed into the lunacy of .....all this.


What could have been a very scholarly, high-end debate, as your intro lent itself, instead has turned into portions of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and the usual barking and sniping -- of which I admit, I have contributed a portion.

It's sad -- but the 'white pride' contingent and neo-confederates are just so lost in their fantasies --


Talent like yours is wasted on them. And so, their crazy parade takes over, and *sigh* -- we find ourselves wallowing at times in lower ebbs of the sludge.

Know this: your OP still, will go down, as one of USMB's finest!

 

[gipper]

Need more?

The first shots were fired in January of 1861.

Buchanan was President and he was trying to resupply Sumter.


Click to enlarge

The South fired upon the Union Steamship Star of the West

They took another ship and seized it: "The Marion."

Then converted her to a Man of War ship.
THE STEAMSHIP "MARION." ; SEIZED BY THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA TO BE CONVERTED INTO A MAN-OF-WAR.

Star of the West

Note the date on the Harpers Weekly newspaper: January, 1861, linked above.
THE FIRST OF THE WAR.

"WE publish herewith pictures of the United States steam-sloop Brooklyn, and of the steamship Star of the West, and of the steamship Marion, which three vessels figured so prominently in the movements of last week; and on page 37 we give a large plan of Charleston harbor, showing the forts, etc., together with a view of Fort Johnson. These pictures will enable our readers to realize what is going on in this most memorable contest of the present age.

On Wednesday morning, January 9, 1861, the

first shots were fired At daybreak on that morning at the steamship Star of the West, with 250 United States troops on board, attempted to enter the harbor of Charleston for the purpose of communicating with Fort Sumter

The people of Charleston had been warned of her coming and of her errand by telegraph. They determined to prevent her reaching Fort Sumter. Accordingly, as soon as she came within range, batteries on Morris Island and at Fort Moultrie opened on her. The first shot was fired across her bows ;

whereupon she increased her speed, and hoisted the stars and stripes. Other shots were then fired in rapid succession from Morris Island, two or more of which hulled the steamer, and compelled her to put about and go to sea.

The accompanying picture shows the Star of the West as she entered Charleston harbor; the plan will explain the situation of the forts, and the position of the steamer when she was fired upon. The channel through which she passed runs close by Morris Island for some distance.
Fort Sumter made no demonstration, except at the port-holes, where guns were run out bearing on Morris Island."


They did this before Lincoln even set foot in the office. Before they had even all officially Seceded. An ACT OF WAR.

Seizing government property of forts and arsenals all across the South is also an Act of War.

To the Lincoln cultist the firing on Ft. Sumter by SC state troops, in which no one was killed, is an act of war. As such, Lincoln and the Federal government was justified in destroying all seceding states (not just SC), subverting the Constitution, and the deaths of 850k Americans. How small minded does one have to be, to think a bloodless bombing is worth that?

The cultist ignores the fact that nearly all federal facilities in seceding states, were peacefully surrendered.

The cultist ignores that the seceding states offered Lincoln compensation for all federal facilities on their land and their share of the federal deficit. All of which, Lincoln ignored.

The cultist also ignores the fact that Lincoln set up events at Ft Sumter, to provoke war...and even now after all these years, Americans still believe his deception.

 

[Rogue 9]

James, you never did answer the question.

If the Articles government was working so well, why was a convention called to alter it?

The answer to that question is instructive, but I'm curious to see your opinion.

Also, to address this:

One last thing...
Rogue9, You state that YOUR passport shows you as a U.S. citizen; this is because YOU submitted to the fictional jurisdiction established under UCC, I would not expect any ignorant such as you who has clearly shewn himself to have no understanding of his own U.S. CONstitution to understand how to obtain a passport wherein you are a flesh and blood American citizen. I have witnessed this having been accomplished by the Late Douglas McPherson, who had more intelligence in his little toe, than you have in your feeble brain.

Charming. Tell me, did George Washington also submit to "the fictional jurisdiction established under UCC," whatever UCC is supposed to mean in this context? From his Last Will and Testament:

I, George Washington of Mount Vernon, a citizen of the United States and lately President of the same, do make, ordain and declare this instrument, which is written with my own hand and every page thereof subscribed with my name, to be my last Will and Testament, revoking all others.

That isn't exactly new language, sir.

I apologize for letting this get so out of hand; I was occupied all day and into the evening on Wednesday and I'm only just now catching up with the several pages of posts that appeared in the interval.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

without slavery none of it would have happened), and that is what matters to the causes of the war.

wrong of course, Lincoln did not object to slavery as much as he objected to the slave power or the highly concentrated wealth that came with the slave economy.
You could just as easily say it would not have happened without Kansas or Nebraska.

In the end it was the same old clash between Plato and Aristotle or between freedom and big liberal govt. Lincoln was on the side of big liberal govt and did more to reverse the principles of the Revolution than FDR.

 

[Rogue 9]

without slavery none of it would have happened), and that is what matters to the causes of the war.

wrong of course, Lincoln did not object to slavery as much as he objected to the slave power or the highly concentrated wealth that came with the slave economy.
You could just as easily say it would not have happened without Kansas or Nebraska.

In the end it was the same old clash between Plato and Aristotle or between freedom and big liberal govt. Lincoln was on the side of big liberal govt and did more to reverse the principles of the Revolution than FDR.

You miss the point entirely. If the Slave Power did not feel the need to protect the institution of slavery, they would not have opted for secession and war. Lincoln's actual opinion is immaterial to the issue (not that you have that right either).

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

. If the Slave Power did not feel the need to protect the institution of slavery, they would not have opted for secession and war.

Yes , I agree. They were protecting their freedom from big liberal govt.

 

[Rogue 9]

. If the Slave Power did not feel the need to protect the institution of slavery, they would not have opted for secession and war.

Yes , I agree. They were protecting their freedom from big liberal govt.

Did you seriously just say that? I mean, really, did you actually just say that?

The Slave Power had been wielding the federal government like a club for nearly eighty years. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 ran roughshod over the rights of the free states. If that wasn't enough, the delegates of the Deep South states walked out of the Democratic National Convention in 1860 because the convention refused to add a platform plank calling for a federal guarantee of slave property in every single U.S. territory. That is, they bailed on their party, nominated Breckinridge, and thereby elected Lincoln because they did not get an unprecedented expansion of federal power that they had demanded. It cannot be stressed enough that the secessions were over an unmet demand for a federal guarantee of slavery. Here, read this; it'll help.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

the convention refused to add a platform plank calling for a federal guarantee of slave property in every single U.S. territory. That is, they bailed on their party, nominated Breckinridge, and thereby elected Lincoln because they did not get an unprecedented expansion of federal power that they had demanded. It cannot be stressed enough that the secessions were over an unmet demand for a federal guarantee of slavery. Here, read this; it'll help.

and still the war was caused because the south did not want to submit to liberal central govt. Do you understand now?

 

[Discombobulated]

the convention refused to add a platform plank calling for a federal guarantee of slave property in every single U.S. territory. That is, they bailed on their party, nominated Breckinridge, and thereby elected Lincoln because they did not get an unprecedented expansion of federal power that they had demanded. It cannot be stressed enough that the secessions were over an unmet demand for a federal guarantee of slavery. Here, read this; it'll help.

and still the war was caused because the south did not want to submit to liberal central govt. Do you understand now?

Have you ever in your whole life said anything that made any sense to anyone?

 

[Discombobulated]

without slavery none of it would have happened), and that is what matters to the causes of the war.

wrong of course, Lincoln did not object to slavery as much as he objected to the slave power or the highly concentrated wealth that came with the slave economy.
You could just as easily say it would not have happened without Kansas or Nebraska.

In the end it was the same old clash between Plato and Aristotle or between freedom and big liberal govt. Lincoln was on the side of big liberal govt and did more to reverse the principles of the Revolution than FDR.

The freedom to hold slaves.......interesting manifestation of freedom.