The Civil War buff in me demands that I ask this question. Are there any lingering legal relationships, effects, etc. of the Confederacy’s de facto existence? Obviously the Confederacy no longer exists, but are there any ghostly remnants hiding behind obscure laws or contracts? E.g. does, or did, the United States take responsibility for any treaties entered into by the Confederacy? Are there any countries that still theoretically have a relationship with it, have special trade or immigration relationships with, or otherwise assume it still exists in their laws because they never bothered to repeal old laws or withdraw from treaties after the Confederacy surrendered? Are there any still-in-effect contracts that specify the Confederacy under a choice of law clause (whether or not such a clause could now have any effect in a US or other court would also be interesting)? Are Confederate court judgments enforceable or recognized today? E.g. if John D. Quigglypuff was in jail on Confederate Federal charges when Lee surrendered, did he have to be released after the war because his conviction was not recognized by the US or did he go to a US Federal prison or a State Prison to finish his sentence? Is the US considered a Successor State to the Confederacy?
I know that, after the war, there were changes to civil rights laws. I am talking more of situations that refer to the Confederacy as a sovereign nation, rather than the practical effects that the US took after the war and later during the Civil Rights movement to handle issues of discrimination.
I also know that some jurisdictions in the US may use the Confederate flag as a point of historical pride, but this obviously can not legally make them part of the Confederacy any more.
The only foreign power that kinda-sorta-not-really did anything approaching diplomatic recognition of the CSA was the small German state of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, which appointed a diplomatic consul. (cite: Saxe-Coburg and Gotha - Wikipedia ) But neither they, nor anybody else, recognized the CSA as a power or entered into treaties with it.
Not for lack of trying on the Confederacy’s part, though:
The 14th Amendment specifically prohibits Congress from assuming the debts of the old Confederacy. I think the closest you might come would be pensions paid by various southern states to Confederate veterans and their widdows, but they have all died off, I think.
West Virginia still exists as a separate state broken off from Virginia.
That;s the only thing I can think of, and it was actually done by the residents together with the US Government. Though you could stretch it to say it was ‘an effect’ of the Confederate States.
You will occasionally find all sorts of old nonsense attached to real estate deeds re no sales allowed to blacks, Jews, etc. bu these are routinely ignored as matter of course as they are legally void and unenforceable.
As a Virginian I’ve always felt West Virginia was probably illegitimate, but if legitimate they got in by the thinnest of legitimate margins.
Under the Constitution you cannot split a State in two without the consent of that State. In theory, since the legislature in Richmond had voted secession it was no longer viewed as the “real” legislature of Virginia. So a legislature convened in Wheeling and proclaimed itself the “real” Virginia legislature. This legislature was made up almost exclusively of politicians from the Western part of the State, they promptly moved for a popular vote on the Western counties seceding from Virginia.
In the end, more votes came in as favoring secession from Virginia than staying with Virginia. The legislature in Wheeling then organized a constitution and got approval from President Lincoln to basically become a State, and were voted in by the Congress.
A lot of problems with the Wheeling Convention though:
[ul]
[li]The Wheeling Convention was not made up of people elected for the purpose of representing the Western half of Virginia.[/li][li]Many persons in the Wheeling Convention were not elected by anyone. Many members were chosen by various different methods, for example a council meeting, acclamation, and many were just prominent politicians in Virginia from the Western counties who just showed up at the convention and took seats–they were not chosen or elected by anyone.[/li][li]In the actual vote, most of the counties that became Southern West Virginia did not vote at all. They were more loyal to the government in Richmond, many of the men were off fighting for the Confederacy, so they didn’t return any votes. The central counties voted, but not in favor of secession from Virginia. The northern counties voted overwhelmingly in favor, enough to outvote the central counties. So only in the northern part of West Virginia was there a legitimate popular vote for secession, the central part of the State voted and voted against it, and the Southern part of the State did not even observe the legitimacy of the referendum. However all of those counties became part of West Virginia.[/li][li]Several counties in what became the Eastern Panhandle were not involved in the original referendum at all, and were just basically conquered by the Union armies and given to West Virginia for strategic reasons, and West Virginia got to keep them.[/li][/ul]
In various SCOTUS cases between States bordering WV and WV West Virginia invaribly won. Virginia later sued to get the eastern panhandle states back and lost. Maryland sued over the border and lost. Ohio sued over the border and lost. (That was mostly legitimate against Maryland and Ohio, they both were trying to secure more favorable borders than they had had with Virginia under the theory that West Virginia as a new State wasn’t immediately entitled to the same benefits as Virginia, for example Virginia’s border with Ohio ended at the far side of the Ohio river which is why almost none of the Ohio river is actually in the State of Ohio, Ohio tried to change that situation with West Virginia but lost.) Due to the outcome of various SCOTUS cases, obviously West Virginia is technically legitimate, I have always felt that the SCOTUS was swayed by West Virginia’s being a loyalist State that broke away from the most politically important State in the Confederacy. I think from a strict legal viewpoint West Virginia’s actions are not legitimate and West Virginia should not have been made a State.
The one SCOTUS case I believe Virginia won against West Virginia involved the public debts, West Virginia ended up having to assume something like 1/3rd of the total debts of Virginia that were incurred before 1861 or something.
I read an interesting article more in line with the OP’s question.
In the State of Alabama they established what we would essentially call a nursing home for old Confederate veterans. Funding for this nursing home was set to be taken from property taxes collected statewide, and this funding was put in place in the actual constitution of Alabama. (If you watch a famous video on YouTube you’ll find that Alabama’s constitution basically contains most local ordinances and laws so it isn’t particularly remarkable that this is in Alabama’s constitution.)
Anyway, fast forward a few years and all the Confederate veterans have died. The tax remains in place, though, so the State decides to build a museum. Fast forward to the year 2012, and the museum is still funding by a permanent appropriation of property tax revenue into a Confederate veteran’s fund: link
I heard one legal thory on the vote which was fairly interesting… It passed with a 100% yes vote. How? Because voting against was an act of treason. People who commit treason are not allowed to vote. Therefore, any vote for treason is invalid. Hence, it passes with 100% for!
I don’t think that this is really what they did- but even in 6th grade, it was obvious that the election was rigged, that the more mountainous region had a strong movement to get away from the eastern part of VA, and this was a good way to do it.
Although it is nice to point out that WV is the only state to leave the Confederacy to join the Union…
[ul]
[li]The Wheeling Convention was not made up of people elected for the purpose of representing the Western half of Virginia.[/li][li]Many persons in the Wheeling Convention were not elected by anyone. Many members were chosen by various different methods, for example a council meeting, acclamation, and many were just prominent politicians in Virginia from the Western counties who just showed up at the convention and took seats–they were not chosen or elected by anyone.[/ul][/li][/QUOTE]
It’s been a long time since I read my Max Farrand or any other Constitutional Convention stuff - but how many of those guys were actually elected by someone to serve? Probably they were all selected by their respective governing bodies, but I’d imagine that if Franklin, Madison or Washington decided to show up, no one would have turned them away. And who would send someone named Gouverneur, at any rate?
No, it didn’t. The ordinance to create a new state out of what had been northwestern Virginia was approved by the voters on October 24, 1861 by 18,408 to 781. That’s 96%, not 100%.
No, it wasn’t. Supporting the Confederacy was an act of treason. Opposing the Confederacy but also opposing the creation of a new state was perfectly valid, although obviously not a position that many held.
The election was “rigged” in the sense that Confederate supporters were excluded, and the election was held only in mostly-loyalist counties controlled by the Restored Legislature and Convention (two distinct bodies, but with a great deal of overlapping membership) in Wheeling. But, there is little doubt that the pro-Union voters within what was then northwestern Virginia were heavily in favor of a new state.
A tactic still used in current times.
In Ireland, despite the majority vote for independence, the six northern counties were partitioned off and made into a new ‘country’, which was then made part of the UK.
The obvious problem is that the principles used were pretty much the exact same principles that the government of Virginia invoked when it seceded from the United States. It’s hard to argue that the “secession” of West Virginia was illegal without conceding that the previous secession of Virginia had been illegal.
