From: cowan@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (P. L. Cowan)
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa
Subject: Re: War's Beginning and End (Re: Secession Crisis Lit)
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:47:25 GMT
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab

In article <191lk1INN4mp@agate.berkeley.edu>, turrell@violet.berkeley.edu 
(David Turrell) [DT2] writes:

[DT2] In article <1992Sep12.160939.654@leland.Stanford.EDU>
[DT2] whale@leland.Stanford.EDU (Stephen Schmidt) <SS> writes:

<SS> In article <18s3fsINN8lc@agate.berkeley.edu>
<SS> turrell@violet.berkeley.edu (David Turrell) {DT1} writes:

{DT1} A bit of trivia learned from the book: the Supreme Court has held that
{DT1} the Civil War started on April 19, 1861, when Lincoln proclaimed the
{DT1} blockade of Confederate ports. I suppose Johnson's May 10, 1865,
{DT1} proclamation declaring a cessation of hostilities marked the end.

<SS> I suspect that ruling came up in regards to some question over who could
<SS> collect a pension.

[DT2] Current doesn't say any more about the court case, even to give a
[DT2] citation in the notes; so, more detail on it will have to come from a
[DT2] more intrepid legal scholar. That the legal onset of war doesn't match
[DT2] modern feeling that war commenced at the firing on Fort Sumter on
[DT2] April 12, 1861, is due in large measure to Lincoln's not wanting to
[DT2] appear too aggressive. There wasn't a declaration of war as we would
[DT2] know it, retroactive to the firing on Fort Sumter, similar to FDR's
[DT2] request that the declaration against Japan be made retroactive to the
[DT2] attack on Pearl Harbor.
[DT2] 
------------- Stuff deleted ----------------
[DT2] (Great Britain had accorded belligerent status on May 13, 1861; but
[DT2] never proceeded to full recognition.) A proclamation of April 2, 1866,
------------- Stuff deleted ----------------
[DT2] 
[DT2] -David

I believe that if Lincoln had asked Congress for a Declaration of War 
against the CSA, this would have been taken to mean that the USA
effectively recognized the CSA as an independent nation, and England
and France would have gladly followed suit. As it was, his
announcement of the blockade of ports indicated that a state of
hostilities existed under international law, and it was routine for
England etc. to grant the CSA the status of a "belligerent" as a
consequence. According to Foote, Lincoln did not realise this until it
was explained to him by "a learned visitor" during the "Trent Affair".
When Lincoln learned this linkage was automatic, he expressed
disappointment that this had not been made clear by Sec. of State Seward. 

If this was the situation, it seems reasonable that a judge should rule 
that the Civil "War" had legally started with this incident as well.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. L. Cowan     Please send replies, comments etc. (no flames thank you) to 
COWAN@ANL.GOV  (I'm posting from my own account, but not the preferred one)
        "Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is a War Room!"
from _Dr._Strangelove_or:_How_I_Learned_to_Stop_Worrying_and_Love_the_Bomb_
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa