SHNV's Supporters for Apr. 2012:
Brock Townsend
Faithful Southron, THANK YOU!!

Southern Heritage <br>News and Views: How Secession was Legal. The LAST word!

Friday, May 31, 2013

How Secession was Legal. The LAST word!

You've never been told the real reason secession is lawful, so I will tell you now. You were never taught this in school, but it was taught before 1861. Thomas Jefferson even mentions that it is legal and may be needed. It takes a QUORUM of a simple majority to hold a session of Congress. HOWEVER read the following: Adjournment of Congress sine die a Latin term meaning “without [fixed] day”; No day is set for reconvening.

Seven southern nation States of America walked out of the Second Session of the Thirty-sixth Congress on March 27, 1861.

In so doing, the Constitutional due process quorum necessary for Congress to vote was (temporarily) lost and Congress was adjourned sine die, or "without day." To some, this meant that there was no lawful quorum to set a specific day and time to reconvene. Some say that according to Robert's Rules of Order, Congress automatically dissolved because there are no
provisions within the Constitution allowing the passage of any Congressional vote without a quorum of the States. Keep in mind that Robert's Rules of Order was created and published by Henry Martyn Robert who was born in South Carolina in 1837.

He sold a half million copies of his rules by 1914. Those rules were not made a part of the Constitution or any Amendment to the Constitution. According to The Constitution, Congress was only required to meet at least once in every year on a specific date unless changed by law and a smaller number may adjourn from day to day. Therefore, because there were no other provisions, dissolution does not take place unless "the people", the creators thereof, or the posterity thereof, the sovereigns of the states, say so.

This is why you read newspapers in 1861 stating, "The Union Is Dissolved!". Note this is COMPLETELY legal Constitutionally because there is NOTHING in the US Constitution forcing any state to send it any Congressional Delegation. This also proves that it was the States which had the power to dictate to the Federal Government who was in overall control of the government.

Now I ask, if there is nothing forcing a state to send a delegation to Congress, who can force them? And I ask; By purposely not sending members to a Federal Congress; Doesn't that mean a state is exercizing its' sovereignty and may be showing that it has no intention of further participation in the Federal Government? And who is to tell them they can't do this? (The 9th and 10th Amendments SPECIFICALLY states that ALL rights NOT SPECIFICALLY delegated to the US Federal Government is retained by the States and the People! If it's not listed under the US Constitution and made into law, it is the RIGHT of the State and the People! Now I ask again; Who RETAINS the Right to send people to Congress and who has the right to force them to participate in a Federal Government?)

It was Lincoln who *unconstitutionally* called for Congress to reconvene in July 1861, after he had accomplished his task against South Carolina. See *Casus Belli*(Causing an act for war.) All acts leading to the war came from Lincoln himself, and he permanently broke the US Constitution in doing so. He said so himself by stating, "In saving the union I have destroyed the Republic." You are now seeing the final results of this breaking of the US Constitution, this treason committed by Lincoln in your government today. I will never support, much less fight for such tyranny!

Michael-- Deo Vindicabamur


OK Then; Ya'll liked what'ya read; yes? Well, we're gonna drive the finishing nails in the coffin of the EMPIRE usa! I'm gonna piece together the rest of the story for you... After this, if you study it and do your part, you'll never be defeated in such debates again, NEVER!

From the original post above I continue.

Do NOT let anyone bring slavery OR tariffs or any other issue into the the secession debates. If you do you'll only be justifying a cause for them to debate and argue with you over. There is NO cause to debate as it is a State's Right to secede, and for NO reason if they so desire! Not only that slavery was Constitutionally legal, plus reading Lincoln's 1st Inaugural Address, Lincoln himself claims slavery is NOT the issue, while being denied collecting tariffs and taxes was a reason for war.

Your opponent will claim states listed slavery as a reason for secession and *some* did in fact list such. However that is a moot and void point as it was Constitutionally a State's Right to have slaves as well as ONLY a choice for any State to state ANY reason for secession for NONE was legally needed!

HOWEVER 4 States known as the BACKBONE of the Confederacy did NOT secede over slavery or tariffs. Matter of fact they had already voted just weeks before to remain in the union. But something changed all this. Few people seems to have any idea what it was, so I'm gonna tell'ya!

Those 4 states of NC, VA, TN and AR seceded because after Lincoln "provoked"

South Carolina into firing on Fort Sumter (Remember Casus Belli and read the conspiracy correspondence between Lincoln and a Capt. G V Foxx shows it was planned.)

Lincoln used this excuse to attack South Carolina and called for the states still in the union to furnish men for the federal army. Those states refused to send men and said it was none of their business what SC did as the US government should have left those federal properties. Note: Lincoln also broke a verbal treaty with South Carolina by provoking CS to fire on Sumter (again Casus Belli) because Lincoln secretly sent men and provisions to the fort against the treaty.

The treaty can be proven by the fact of the telegram Lincoln sent SC Gov Pickens. Lincoln simply told Gov Pickens he would be reinforcing Fort Sumter regardless to anything said previous and that it was up to SC to decide to allow it peacefully or use force to try and stop it.

But this is not all of the story of why those 4 states seceded. Lincoln notified VA and NC that federal troops/armies would be crossing their states and requisitioning supplies on their way to attack SC. Both states flatly refused to allow such to happen. (Note that the states of NC and VA had voted just a few weeks previous on the bill of secession and both states had voted to remain in the union.)

Lincoln's response to those states was, if you don't allow what I want, then I consider you in rebellion against the US Government.

Within 2-3 weeks of this all four states had voted to secede, with NC and VA holding their second referendum on secession, with it passing by large numbers this time.

Anyone tell me; What did this have to do with tariffs, taxes or slavery? It did have to do with State's Rights as did the other issues concerning slavery, tariffs, taxes and secession.

Here is an article that was in the New York Times concerning the state of North Carolina and it seceding.

The condemnations adds up against the Federals. First Lincoln plans a secret provocation (Casus Belli) in forcing South Carolina to attack Fort Sumter. Then he illegally and unconstitutionally calls for states to send men, supplies and furnish them the land to march across in attacking another state. After this Lincoln nullifies the writ of Habeas Corpus, imprisons people without due process, takes over railroads, shuts down newspapers and other unconstitutional acts. Finally Lincoln calls Congress to session illegally in order to claim he done the best he could and read the US Constitution the way *he* thought it should be read in dealing with the seceding states AND the firing on Fort Sumter which HE, Lincoln masterminded.

Michael-Deo Vindicabamur


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Please LIKE my
Freedom Watch
Facebook page
share it with friends

Please LIKE my
Southern Heritage News
& Views Facebook page
share it with friends.