Guess What Folks–Secesson Wasn’t Treason
by Al Benson Jr.
More and more of late I have been reading articles dealing with certain black
racist groups that claim to have the best interests of average black folks at
heart (they really don’t). It seems these organizations can’t take time to address
the problems of black crime in the black community or of single-parent families
in the black community in any meaningful way. It’s much more lucrative for them
(and it gets more press coverage) if they spend their time and resources attacking
Confederate symbols. Ive come to the conclusion that they really don’t give a
rip for the welfare of black families. They only use that as a facade to mask
their real agenda–the destruction of Southern, Christian culture.
Whenever they deal with questions pertaining to history they inevitably come
down on that same old lame horse that the South was evil because they seceded
from the Union–and hey–everybody knows that secession was treason anyway.
Sorry folks, but that old line is nothing more than a gigantic pile of cow chips
that smells real ripe in the hot August sun! And I suspect that many of them
know that–they just don’t want you to know it–all the better to manipulate
you my dear!
It is interesting that those people never mention the fact that the New England
states threatened secession three times–that’s right three times–before 1860.
In 1814 delegates from those New England states actually met in Hartford, Connecticut
to consider seceding from the Union. Look up the Hartford Convention of 1814
on the Internet if you want a little background. Hardly anyone ever mentions
the threatened secession of the New England states. Most "history"
books I’ve seen never mention it. Secession is never discussed until 1860 when
it suddenly became "treasonous" for the Southern states to do it.
What about the treasonous intent of the New England states earlier? Well, you
see, it’s only treasonous if the South does it.
Columnist Joe Sobran, whom I enjoy, once wrote an article in which he stated
that "…Jefferson was an explicit secessionist. For openers he wrote a
famous secessionist document known to posterity as the Declaration of Independence."
If these black racist groups are right, that must mean that Jefferson was guilty
of treason, as were Washington and all these others that aided them in our secession
from Great Britain. Maybe the black racists all wish they were still citizens
of Great Britain. If that’s the case, then as far as I know, the airlines are
still booking trips to London, so nothing is stopping them.
After the War of Northern Aggression against the South was over (at least the
shooting part) the abolitionist radicals in Washington decided they would try
Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States as a co-conspirator in
the Lincoln assassination (which would have been just great for Edwin M. Stanton)
and as a traitor for leading the secessionist government in Richmond, though
secession had hardly been original with Mr. Davis. However, trying Davis for
treason as a secessionist was one trick the abolitionist radicals couldn’t quite
Burke Davis, (no relation to Jeff Davis that I know of) in his book The Long
Surrender on page 204, noted a quote by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, telling
Edwin Stanton that "If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn
the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion…His (Jeff Davis’)
capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him
of treason." Burke Davis then continued on page 214, noting that a congressiona
committee proposed a special court for Davis’ trial, headed by Judge Franz Lieber.
Davis wrote: "After studying more than 270,000 Confederate documents, seeking
evidence against Davis, the court discouraged the War Department: ‘Davis will
be found not guilty,’ Lieber reported ‘and we shall stand there completely beaten’."
What the radical Yankees and their lawyers were admitting among themselves (but
quite obviously not for the historical record) was that they and Lincoln had
just fought a war of aggression agains the Southern states and their people,
a war that had taken or maimed the lives of over 600,000 Americans, both North
and South, and they had not one shread of constitutional justification for having
done so, nor had they any constitutional right to have impeded the Southern
states when they chose to withdraw from a Union for which they were paying 83%
of all the expenses, while getting precious little back for it, save insults
from the North.
Most of us detest big government or collectivism. Yet, since the advent of
the Lincoln administration we have been getting ever increasing doses of it.
Lincoln was, in one sense, the "great emancipator" in that he freed
the federal government from any chains the constitution had previously bound
it with, so it could now roam about unfettered "seeking to devous whoseover
it could." And where the Founders sought to give us "free and independent
states" is anyone naive enough anymore as to think the states are still
free and independent? Those who honestly still think that are prime candidates
for belief in the Easter Bunny, for he is every bit as real as is the "freedom"
our states experience at this point in history. Our federal government today
is even worse than what our forefathers went to war against Britain to prevent.
And because we have been mostly educated in their government brain laundries
(public schools) most still harbor the illusion that they are "free."
Well, as they say, "the brainwashed never wonder."
Copyright © 2006-2007 Al Benson, Jr.
On The Web: