By legal definition, the government of this country has been a criminal enterprise since April of 1865.
When the Confederate States capitulated, “Just” government as defined in our Declaration of Independence ceased to exist in this country.
One can blather on about slavery and racism, both of which have replaced baseball as the national pastime, until pigs fly—it will not change the fact that at the time the Southern states voted to secede, slavery was constitutional in this country; reprehensible and unconscionable yes, but still constitutional. Therefore, it was impossible for the Southern states to have seceded to protect slavery, for slavery legally existed before and after articles of secession were voted on and passed by the people of those states.
The U.S. Supreme Court in 1857 in the Dred Scott opinion, confirmed the constitutionality of slavery. Of course, that opinion was morally bankrupt, just like a number of recent decisions rendered by the sacerdotal nine such as the Affordable Care Act, the Patriot Act, The National Defense Authorization Act and many more.
Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1776 that a “Just” government requires the “consent of the governed.” Then in 1861-62, several states withdrew their consent to be governed by what they viewed as a tyrannical government.
While indeed a case can be made that South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Texas seceded, in part, because of slavery, this is not true of Virginia, Arkansas, North Carolina, and Tennessee. (It should be noted here that Texas submitted the articles of secession to the people of that state for a popular vote; where the vote was 44,317 in favor of secession, 13,020 opposed).
It is also of particular note that when the Texas legislature voted to secede and included an amendment to submit the final vote to the people, there was in San Antonio a US government arsenal with a 3,000 man garrison. When the Texas Committee on Public Safety authorized the seizure of all federal property in the state, the garrison of men was allowed to leave peacefully. Lincoln did not in any way attempt to retain this post or resupply the government forces there. Compare this with the events which occurred later at Ft. Sumter.
So, if slavery was not the reason for the vote to secede by the four states mentioned earlier—then why did those four Southern states, all of which initially voted to stay in the Union, eventually vote to secede? Let’s look at each of them.
When a compromise could not be reached among the delegates to the initial secession convention, it was agreed the issue of secession would be put to a vote of the people. This vote was scheduled for August of 1861. Of course, debate continued around the state.
Then, on April 12, Fort Sumter was fired upon in response to resupply efforts by Union ships. Lincoln then ordered governor Rector to provide 780 men to assist the Union in invading the states that had previously seceded (to put down the rebellion). Governor Rector promptly refused.
The secession convention reconvened on May 6, 1861, and at 10 minutes past 4 that afternoon the Arkansas delegates “declared their independence from the United States” by a vote of 65-5 with 4 of the opposing votes later changing their votes to the affirmative.
Therefore, many of the delegates who were anti-slavery and voted consistently to remain in the Union changed their votes almost unanimously when Lincoln ordered the state to supply troops to invade the Southern states. Arkansas seceded, not to support slavery, but rather than to supply troops to invade their sister states.
First, it should be noted the people of North Carolina had refused to include Abraham Lincoln on the presidential ballot in 1860. The majority of voters supported John C. Breckenridge and Constitutional Union Party candidate John Bell in that election because both candidates had expressed allegiance to the Union. The people of North Carolina were desirous of staying in the Union, but a union without Lincoln as president.
Those who favored Union in the Tar Heel State; the yeoman farmers (who seldom owned slaves) of the piedmont and mountainous western part of the state were in the majority and when secession was first put to a vote the supporters of remaining in the Union prevailed 47,323 to 46,672.
Then came Ft. Sumter. On April 15th President Lincoln called for troops from North Carolina to which Governor Ellis responded, “You can get no troops from North Carolina.” A convention met in Raleigh in May to revisit the issue of secession. The enthusiasm and fervor of the initial debate was gone. The convention was characterized by speeches of those who had previously favored union to secession and their denunciation of Lincoln’s “aggression.” Former Unionist, George Badger, introduced a resolution for separation based on “the right of revolution” but it was defeated by a resolution to “dissolve the Union by repeal of ratification.” Delegate Jonathan Worth stated, “Lincoln has made us a unit to resist until we repel our invaders or die.” It has been stated by the North Carolina History Project that “Tar Heels of North Carolina seceded as an act of self-defense.” Is self-defense “racial?”
It should also be noted that North Carolina provided more supplies and men to the Confederate States and lost more men killed on the field of battle than any other state. This they did, not to support slavery, but as an act of self-defense. Revisionist historians, government lackeys, cultural Marxists, a majority of teachers, college professors, and race-baiters completely ignore this fact.
According to documents at the University of Middle Tennessee,“[Tennessee] residents exhibited little support for secession until the April 1861 firing on Ft. Sumter and Lincoln’s call for troops.”
It should be noted here that like North Carolina, Abraham Lincoln did not appear on the presidential ballot in Tennessee in 1860. Carrying all of Tennessee’s electoral votes was John Bell of the Constitutional Union Party who secured 48% of the popular vote.
In February of 1861, after seven states had voted to secede, voters in Tennessee voted overwhelmingly against convening a state convention on secession. But, after Ft. Sumter and Lincoln’s order for Tennessee to provide two regiments of troops to invade the seceded states, Tennessee voted to secede on June 8th of 1861. The citizens of Eastern Tennessee unsuccessfully petitioned the state to remain in the Union.
Here again is documented proof that another state which initially refused to secede, voted to secede rather than provide troops to invade their sister states.
On February 13, 1861, delegates representing every county in the state of Virginia met in convention and voted to remain in the Union. In an early exhibit of transparency in government, the governor and legislature of Virginia invited the newspapers of the day to witness and report on the convention with the Richmond Enquirer selected to “publish a full record of the proceedings” for public consumption.
On April 17, after receiving orders to provide troops to “put down the rebellion,” Virginia governor John Letcher responded to Lincoln’s request directly to Simon Cameron, Lincoln’s Secretary of War:
SIR: I received your telegram of the 15th…in which I am requested to detach from the militia of the State of Virginia “the quota designated in a table,” which you append, “to serve as infantry or riflemen for the period of three months, unless sooner discharged.”
In reply to this communication, I have only to say that the militia of Virginia will not be furnished to the powers at Washington for any such use or purpose as they have in view. Your object is to subjugate the Southern States, and a requisition made upon me for such an object — an object, in my judgment, not within the purview of the Constitution or the act of 1795 — will not be complied with. You have chosen to inaugurate civil war, and having done so, we will meet it in a spirit as determined as the Administration has exhibited towards the South. Respectfully,
JOHN LETCHER. (Emphasis mine)
I highly recommend you read the entirety of Governor Letcher’s communications with Secretary of War Cameron which can be found here.
Documented history reveals that four (4) states did not secede because of slavery but due to the unconstitutional acts of Abraham Lincoln. Several of these states viewed Lincoln’s call-up of troops to “put down the rebellion” as an act of war, and certainly unconstitutional, as the Congress had not been consulted when Lincoln’s orders were issued to the states to provide troops. Lincoln was clearly in violation of Article III Section III of the Constitution which defines Treason.“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them…”
Lincoln unconstitutionally issued an order calling up troops in order to “put down the rebellion” which would require “levying war against them (states),” for, according to Lincoln, all states that had seceded were still in the Union. Lincoln unconstitutionally ordered up troops in order to commit an act of Treason. At least four states saw it this way and withdrew their consent to be governed by tyranny.
According to our Constitution (Article IV Section IV) the governor or legislature must request the federal government to intervene in a domestic disturbance (rebellion) within a state. If the Southern states were still in the Union as Lincoln declared, he violated the Constitution by sending troops into those states without the proper request by the governor or legislatures of those states.
The battle flags that flew over the soldiers and sailors from these four states cannot logically be called “racist.” To do so conforms only to the wishes of the cultural Marxists who currently control our government, our media and the emotional minds of the grossly uneducated/socialist indoctrinated in this country, known to Rebels as useful idiots.
If you stand for “resistance to tyranny” and oppressive government, by default you stand for the principles of the Battle Flag of the Confederacy, for as it appears on a gate at Jefferson’s Monticello:“Resistance to Tyranny is Obedience to God.”
Clear battle lines have been drawn in our country. They represent on one side the principles of Thomas Jefferson and on the other those of Abraham Lincoln and his penpal Karl Marx.
Unfortunately for Liberty and our country, the majority have sided with Lincoln, Marx, and our current criminal enterprise called government.
IN RIGHTFUL REBEL LIBERTY