A House Divided: Views


Posted at 11:42 AM ET, 05/06/2011

Dennis Frye: What authority did Abraham Lincoln have to call up 75,000 troops to defend Washington and to blockade most Southern ports?

”The proclamation of blockade by the President is, of itself, conclusive evidence that a state of war existed which demanded and authorized recourse to such measure.” Thus determined the United States Supreme Court in the Prize Cases, settled in 1862 in a split 5-4 decision.

By Dennis Frye  |  11:42 AM ET, 05/06/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views, Views

Posted at 11:33 AM ET, 05/06/2011

William Blair: What legal authority did Abraham Lincoln have to call up 75,000 troops to defend Washington and to blockade most Southern ports?

To find the answer to this two-pronged question, forget about the Constitution. This fundamental law of the nation is surprisingly quiet about any war powers that the president might claim. In fact, the term “war powers” never appears under the the sections dealing with the executive.

By William Blair  |  11:33 AM ET, 05/06/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views, Views

Posted at 08:00 AM ET, 04/27/2011

John Marszalek: What legal authority did President Lincoln have to call up 75,000 troops to defend Washington and to order the blockade of most Southern ports?

Lincoln had acted unilaterally because he did not want to ask Congress for a declaration of war, believing that such an act would give the Confederacy recognition as an independent nation...

By Linda Wheeler  |  08:00 AM ET, 04/27/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, Views, 150th anniversary, 150th anniversary

Posted at 08:00 AM ET, 04/27/2011

Harold Holzer: What legal authority did President Lincoln have to call up 75,000 troops to defend Washington and to order the blockade of most Southern ports?

Established 18th century law arguably gave Abraham Lincoln adequate power to confront the gravest crisis in the 19th century by calling for volunteers after the attack on Fort Sumter....

By Harold Holzer  |  08:00 AM ET, 04/27/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary, 150th anniversary

Posted at 08:26 PM ET, 04/19/2011

Jim Campi: How do you explain the crazed, homicidal fury of city residents during the Baltimore Riots of April 19, 1861 in response to Massachusetts troops passing through that city; was that event an anomaly?

One day after the fall of Fort Sumter, President Lincoln issued a proclamation calling for 75,000 volunteers to put down the rebellion. The proclamation stoked passions already running at a fever pitch.

By Jim Campi  |  08:26 PM ET, 04/19/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views, Views

Posted at 10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011

William Blair: How do you explain the crazed, homicidal fury of city residents during the Baltimore Riots of April 19, 1861 in response to Massachusetts troops passing through that city? Was that event an anomaly?

The Baltimore Riot was significant and shocking to some extent, but it represented a rather unremarkable explosion of street violence.

By William Blair  |  10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary, 150th anniversary

Posted at 10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011

Harold Holzer: How do you explain the crazed, homicidal fury of city residents during the Baltimore Riots of April 19, 1861 in response to Massachusetts troops passing through that city. Was that event an anomaly?

Horrifically bloody as it was, the fury that a pro-secession mob unleashed against federal troops on the streets of Baltimore in April 1861 should have surprised no one--least of all President Abraham Lincoln.

By Harold Holzer  |  10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views, Views

Posted at 10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011

Frank Williams:How do you explain the crazed, homicidal fury of city residents during the Baltimore Riots of April 19, 1861 in response to Massachusetts troops passing through that city. Was that event an anomaly?

Passions ran deep with the Baltimore “rowdies” prior to their attack on the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment. The plot to assassinate President-elect Lincoln on his passage through Baltimore on February 23, 1861 required the mobs to distract and incite the populace...

By Frank Williams  |  10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary, 150th anniversary

Posted at 10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011

Dennis Frye: How do you explain the crazed, homicidal fury of city residents during the Baltimore Riots of April 19, 1861 in response to Massachusetts troops passing through that city. Was that event an anomaly?

Baltimore was a melting pot that was in regular meltdown during much of the 1850s. It was also the largest the largest city in the South....

By Linda Wheeler  |  10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views, Views

Posted at 10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011

Dana Shoaf: How do you explain the crazed, homicidal fury of city residents during the Baltimore Riots of April 19, 1861 in response to Massachusetts troops passing through that city. Was that event an anomaly?

If other upper South cities were similarly tied to the plantation economy for their well-being, I believe violence would have occurred.

By Dana Shoaf  |  10:00 AM ET, 04/19/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views, Views

Posted at 03:39 PM ET, 04/11/2011

Dennis Frye: By attempting to resupply Ft. Sumter, did President Lincoln purposely provoke the war?

The provocation of civil war came with Lincoln’s election, not Lincoln’s selection. South Carolina seceded because the North acceded to Republican rule--perceived as abolitionist domination--in the Election of 1860.

By Dennis Frye  |  03:39 PM ET, 04/11/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary

Posted at 03:35 PM ET, 04/11/2011

Craig Symonds: By attempting to resupply Ft. Sumter, did President Lincoln purposely provoke the war?

No.From the first full day of his Presidency, Lincoln’s policy was to prevent a war with the seceded States, not to start one.

By Craig Symonds  |  03:35 PM ET, 04/11/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary

Posted at 03:07 PM ET, 04/11/2011

Brag Bowling: By resupplying Ft. Sumter, did Lincoln purposely provoke war?

By Brag Bowling  |  03:07 PM ET, 04/11/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary

Posted at 02:52 PM ET, 04/11/2011

John Marszalek: By attempting to resupply Ft. Sumter, did President Lincoln purposely provoke the war?

When Abraham Lincoln took his oath of office, the last thing on his mind was starting a civil war that would consume his entire presidency.

By John Marszalek  |  02:52 PM ET, 04/11/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views

Posted at 01:30 PM ET, 04/11/2011

Lonnie Bunch: By resupplying Ft. Sumter, did Lincoln purposely provoke war?

The notion that Abraham Lincoln purposely provoked the Civil War by attempting to resupply Fort Sumter in April 1861 became a cornerstone of the reinterpretation of the Civil War after the defeat of the Confederacy in 1865.

By  |  01:30 PM ET, 04/11/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary

Posted at 04:51 PM ET, 03/31/2011

Dennis Frye: How pervasive was the abolitionist movement and did it influence any of the southern states to secede?

The foundation of the nation was perched precariously atop the seismic fault line of slavery. Slavery shook the Union. Abolitionists applied the pressure that heaved the nation into civil war.

By Dennis Frye  |  04:51 PM ET, 03/31/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary

Posted at 04:32 PM ET, 03/28/2011

John Marszalek: General-in-Chief Winfield Scott’s Anaconda Plan called for the early blockading of sea ports and the Mississippi River to strangle the rebellion; could that plan have worked?

Winfield Scott was one of the nation’s military legends. When he decided not to join secession, even though he was a Virginian, supporters of the Union breathed a collective sigh of relief.

By John Marszalek  |  04:32 PM ET, 03/28/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views

Posted at 03:36 PM ET, 03/28/2011

Frank Williams: General-in-Chief Winfield Scott’s Anaconda Plan called for the early blockading of sea ports and the Mississippi River to strangle the rebellion; could that plan have worked?

Septuagenarian General Winfield Scott’s Anaconda Plan, although ridiculed at first, was proved to be sound but took years and many casualties to effectuate.

By Frank Williams  |  03:36 PM ET, 03/28/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  Views, 150th anniversary

Posted at 03:27 PM ET, 03/28/2011

Lonnie Bunch: General-in-Chief Winfield Scott’s Anaconda Plan called for the early blockading of sea ports and the Mississippi River to strangle the rebellion; could that plan have worked?

General Winfield Scott, the hero of the Mexican-American War, devised a strategy to defeat the recently seceding Southern states that became known as the Anaconda Plan because of the plan’s attempt to surround and strangle the nascent Confederacy.

By Lonnie Bunch  |  03:27 PM ET, 03/28/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views

Posted at 03:23 PM ET, 03/28/2011

Scott Hartwig: General-in-Chief Winfild’s Anaconda Plan called for the early blockading of sea ports and the Mississippi River to strangle the rebellion; could that plan have worked?

In brief, General Scott’s plan called for “a complete blockade” of the Atlantic and Gulf ports to strangle the Confederacy, and a thrust down the Mississippi River with some 60,000 troops to cut the Confederacy in two.

By Scott Hartwig  |  03:23 PM ET, 03/28/2011 |  Permalink  |  Comments ( 0)
Categories:  150th anniversary, Views