# Are there any lingering legal effects/remnants of the Confederate States of America? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 22, 2012, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552 "2012-03-22T22:43:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2012, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/21 "2012-03-24T23:59:27Z")
Getting back to the OP, it’s an interesting question. I think the actions taken by the Confederate national government would be ruled invalid so that would make any theoretical diplomatic actions invalid. Or any laws enacted by the Confederate Congress. But it’s an interesting question about the southern state courts and legislatures. The OP made the point about somebody convicted by an Alabama court for a strictly criminal offense in 1863 and sentenced to ten years imprisonment. Would that sentence have still been considered valid after 1865? Or suppose the Georgia legislature enacted a law in 1862. Would that law still be considered as valid as a law enacted by the Ohio legislature in 1862? Or is there a four year void in southern legal history? ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2012, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/22 "2012-03-25T00:08:34Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Getting back to the OP, it’s an interesting question. I think the actions taken by the Confederate national government would be ruled invalid so that would make any theoretical diplomatic actions invalid. Or any laws enacted by the Confederate Congress. > > But it’s an interesting question about the southern state courts and legislatures. The OP made the point about somebody convicted by an Alabama court for a strictly criminal offense in 1863 and sentenced to ten years imprisonment. Would that sentence have still been considered valid after 1865? Or suppose the Georgia legislature enacted a law in 1862. Would that law still be considered as valid as a law enacted by the Ohio legislature in 1862? Or is there a four year void in southern legal history? This is an interesting take. I wonder what happened to criminal prisoners in Confederate state prisons at the end of the war. Was there an amnesty? It would seem there should be information available about this, but I’ve never seen it mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2012, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/23 "2012-03-25T01:22:23Z")
First step for the OP, look up _Texas v. White_. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2012, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/24 "2012-03-25T03:13:13Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > 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. West Virginian here. 🙂 I tend to agree with what you have said, but I would contend that by deliberately withdrawing from the union, Virginia forfeited or waived any claims it might have that the convention in the Western Counties was illegal. Since the “real” Virginia legislature wouldn’t communicate with the federal government, another was formed. Whether it was legitimate or not is a political question which was answered when Congress and the President approved it. And also, this was before the 14th amendment. “Virginia” had a right to have a legislature in any manner it wanted; even if that was appointing local hack politician to the “legislature.” A Republican form of government, you say? That’s Congress’ job and a Court would likely hold that they did the best they could in a time of secession and war. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2012, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/25 "2012-03-25T03:21:42Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Getting back to the OP, it’s an interesting question. I think the actions taken by the Confederate national government would be ruled invalid so that would make any theoretical diplomatic actions invalid. Or any laws enacted by the Confederate Congress. > > But it’s an interesting question about the southern state courts and legislatures. The OP made the point about somebody convicted by an Alabama court for a strictly criminal offense in 1863 and sentenced to ten years imprisonment. Would that sentence have still been considered valid after 1865? Or suppose the Georgia legislature enacted a law in 1862. Would that law still be considered as valid as a law enacted by the Ohio legislature in 1862? Or is there a four year void in southern legal history? Wasn’t it the position of the north that the resolutions of secession were null and void? If so, then the Georgia legislature or Alabama judges were acting as they always did for their states. Only the resolution of secession was illegal. I realize that this conflicts with the attitude towards West Virginia, but since there was no move to have a “reformed” Georgia legislature, then I would argue that while the ordinance of secession was void, everything else they did was valid. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2012, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/26 "2012-03-25T03:40:04Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > …by deliberately withdrawing from the union, Virginia forfeited or waived any claims it might have that the convention in the Western Counties was illegal. > > Since the “real” Virginia legislature wouldn’t communicate with the federal government, another was formed. Whether it was legitimate or not is a political question which was answered when Congress and the President approved it. > > And also, this was before the 14th amendment. “Virginia” had a right to have a legislature in any manner it wanted; even if that was appointing local hack politician to the “legislature.” A Republican form of government, you say? That’s Congress’ job and a Court would likely hold that they did the best they could in a time of secession and war. Definitely agree. Congress also definitively recognized the new state of West Virginia by counting its Electoral College votes in every presidential election thereafter, and seating its members of the U.S. House and Senate ever since. The purely internal acts and legal processes of the seceded states were never disturbed by the U.S. Government or thought at the time to be illegitimate, from all I’ve read. Obviously it would be a ridiculously huge task to reopen every business contract and retry every state criminal case, for instance, from 1861-65. The _Alabama_ claims, which stemmed from the British permitting Confederate commerce raiders to be built and crewed in British ports, established some lasting international law precedents: [Alabama Claims - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_claims) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 25, 2012, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/27 "2012-03-25T03:47:01Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Wasn’t it the position of the north that the resolutions of secession were null and void? If so, then the Georgia legislature or Alabama judges were acting as they always did for their states. Only the resolution of secession was illegal. > > I realize that this conflicts with the attitude towards West Virginia, but since there was no move to have a “reformed” Georgia legislature, then I would argue that while the ordinance of secession was void, everything else they did was valid. I believe the official position was that the states were still part of the United States but the governments of the states had acted illegally by declaring secession and therefore had no legal authority. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/28 "2012-03-26T12:57:17Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I believe the official position was that the states were still part of the United States but the governments of the states had acted illegally by declaring secession and therefore had no legal authority. IIRC, wasn’t that Sumner and the “state suicide theory” that was advocated by the Radical Republicans, but not given much wide acceptance? In other words, wasn’t the prevailing theory that the southern states had passed secession resolutions that were null and void, but everything else was legit? If not, couldn’t the legislature in 1866 pass a resolution stating that "Everything we did between 1861-1865 is valid but we hereby repeal the secession ordinance, the sense of the Senate resolution that we join the Confederacy, the bill allowing for slave owner compensation, etc. but leave all of the general criminal and civil things intact? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/29 "2012-03-26T13:05:38Z")
> [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](#): > > Definitely agree. Congress also definitively recognized the new state of West Virginia by counting its Electoral College votes in every presidential election thereafter, and seating its members of the U.S. House and Senate ever since. > > The purely internal acts and legal processes of the seceded states were never disturbed by the U.S. Government or thought at the time to be illegitimate, from all I’ve read. Obviously it would be a ridiculously huge task to reopen every business contract and retry every state criminal case, for instance, from 1861-65. > > The _Alabama_ claims, which stemmed from the British permitting Confederate commerce raiders to be built and crewed in British ports, established some lasting international law precedents: [Alabama Claims - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabama_claims) Agreed. Further, I think to take the “West Virginia is not a legal state” argument to its logical conclusion, you would have to say that the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments aren’t legally part of the constitution as well. They were passed with puppet legislatures in place in the southern states with many white citizens who had supported the Confederacy unable to vote. Their approvals (except for the 15th) were essential for the states to regain representation in Congress. There is going to be a certain amount of victor’s justice in any conflict. The north couldn’t just conquer the south and allow them to re-elect the same people who were fighting them. They tried and then got the Black Codes in SC and LA. Getting back to WV, when a state secedes and you have members of that state form a group saying, “Hey, we are loyal citizens and want you to recognize and help us,” then how could the federal government, in any legal or equitable sense, say no to them? ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/30 "2012-03-26T14:19:04Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > 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](http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/07/why-alabama-still-collecting-taxes-confederate-veterans/40220/) Has there ever been a tax that went away after its purpose was done? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![BlinkingDuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/eada6e/32.png) [@BlinkingDuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlinkingDuck)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2012, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/31 "2012-03-26T14:23:57Z")
I have to agree with Martin Hyde in general. However, it probably was legal, though like Martin said just by the thinnest of thin hairs. The Virginia Legislature did vote to break up the state. The Legislature was from Virginia. Just because most of Virginia didn’t send delegates wasn’t that legislatures problem. I still don’t like it and it is a bad precedent even if Virginia was in rebellion. What makes it more palatable is that Virginia proper didn’t really treat West Virginia all that well and WV should probably have been its own state anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/32 "2012-03-27T00:16:36Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Wasn’t it the position of the north that the resolutions of secession were null and void? If so, then the Georgia legislature or Alabama judges were acting as they always did for their states. Only the resolution of secession was illegal. What if it was a judge appointed by the Confederate government? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/33 "2012-03-27T01:03:19Z")
> [@astro](#): > > 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. Those have nothing to do with the Civil War. Restrictive covenants are wholly private agreements between property owners. They didn’t appear until after the war, and did not become commonplace until Buchanan v. Warly in 1917 (when the Supreme Court ruled that racially segregated residential zoning violated the 14th Amendment). ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2012, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552/34 "2012-03-27T01:27:44Z")
> [@BlinkingDuck](#): > > Has there ever been a tax that went away after its purpose was done? 😃 Yes, actually, there was a federal income tax enacted during the Civil War. It was repealed in 1872. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-there-any-lingering-legal-effects-remnants-of-the-confederate-states-of-america/616552.md?page=1)