what was the "economic" reason?  And what was the "self-governance?"
Are you suggesting that when Lincoln became president suddently the
South was no longer about to elect its own governors and state
legislatures?  Or that the South was no longer able to send
representatives to Congress? Or that no Southerners could vote in the
next presidential election?

What *excactly* do you mean by "self-governance"?

Is your theory that because the South did not like who won the election,
the South had a right to make war on the United States, steal property
owned by the rest of the Country, and set up its own country?

In other words, is your theory that if you don't like who wins the
election, you have a right to start your own government?

The city I live in voted against the recently elected Democratic
governor of Oklahoma. Does that mean Tulsa can secede from Oklahoma and
start a new state?

If Virginia does not like a tax bill passed in Congress, can Virginia
leave the U.S.?

Paul Finkelman

[log in to unmask] wrote:
> There was an economic and a self governance one.  Any to say they are
> illegitimate is ridiculous.  They are as legit as moral and political
> rationales.
>
> Tom McMahon
>
>
>
>>Thus, there was no, I repeat no, moral or political justification for
>>secession.
>
>
>
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
> at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>


--
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, Oklahoma  74104-2499

918-631-3706 (office)
918-631-2194 (fax)

[log in to unmask]

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html