Neo-Confederates like to quote Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris of 1783 in odd ways.
This is the actual text.
Article I
His Britannic Majesty, acknowledges the said United States, viz. New-Hampshire, Massachusetts-Bay, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North-Carolina, South-Carolina, Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent States; that he treats them as such; and for himself, his heirs and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety and territorial rights of the same, and every part thereof.
You can read it online as it was printed in the Statues-at-Large here at http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lawhome.html and go to the Statues at Large, Vol. 8, page 80. On page 81 is Article 1.
First note that it is "independent States," and that "States" is capitalized. It is a proper noun and is not referring to states in general. "States" is short for United States. If you take the viz. clause out, the sentence is:
His Britannic Majesty acknowledges the said United States to be free, sovereign and independent [United] States; ....
The treaty is saying the United States is an independent [United] States. "States" is short for United States. The viz. is just explaining of which former colonies these States are. It wouldn't do to have the United States be declared independent while his Britannic majesty was still claiming one of the former colonies.
Neo-Confederates sometimes like to have the Article 1 in capital letters so that the meaning of the text is obscured or have "States" with a lower case "s" to obscure its meaning.
Article 1 is merely saying, the United States is independent and making sure that all the former colonies are included.
Finally, when does the King of Britain define what American government would be, or a peace treaty with a formerly hostile power define what American government is? What the King of Britain thinks American government is or is not is irrelevant. That is what independence was all about. The first constitution of the United States was The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union.
It the intention was that each state was an independent sovereign state individually, the word "each" would be used and "States" not capitalized.
The rest of the treaty implies that it is one sovereign nation involved. For example, the boundary described in the treaty is for the United States as a whole, and the boundaries of the individual states are not described.
The mind of neo-Confederacy is constantly straining to grasp straws. When they are contradicted they resort to name calling.
Friday, September 03, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular Posts Last 30 days
-
Ironically, it is a Republican, not a Democratic candidate who has gotten the most attacks regarding the Confederacy from Neo-Confederate or...
-
I have contacted both of my U.S. Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn . The following is the automated reply from Cornyn and the...
-
At this link is an article on the response to the likely election of Obama as president of the United States in the Canadian National Post ....
-
I give it about 5 minutes after it is announced that Hilary Clinton is the next president of the United States for the secession movements t...
-
Washington Post columnist Colbert King has an opinion piece "Rise of the New Confederacy," about the Republican Party and the Tea...
-
I have added extra metarials to the page. I decided to add the information about the states which have either Confederate or Confederate ide...
-
STUPID CALIFORNIA SECESSIONISTS. Here is one of your supporters. Of course the California secessionists can't support...
-
The Stone Mountain Association wants to put up a Martin Luther King statue at Stone Mountain. Here is an article on the proposal: http:/...
-
It might be asserted that since the Southern Partisan is no longer being published it is not of importance that Jeff Sessions came to the d...
-
The article is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 Incidentally...
Popular Posts All Time
-
The article is here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/10/AR2010081004586.html?hpid=opinionsbox1 Incidentally...
-
At this link is an article on the response to the likely election of Obama as president of the United States in the Canadian National Post ....
-
The ramp which was used by the cranes and other lifting equipment to go up and in the enclosed area and remove the statues and the base has ...
-
Washington Post columnist Colbert King has an opinion piece "Rise of the New Confederacy," about the Republican Party and the Tea...
-
There hasn't been an issue of the Southern Partisan (SP) for some time, about a year. I was doing some Internet researching and I stumb...
-
The other major neo-Confederate groups have gone under or just live on as remnants. The League of the South is just perhaps a dozen or may...
-
There is a new movie coming out, "12 Years a Slave." The link to the review and a trailer is at this link: http://www.slate.com/...
-
The League of the South (LS) put up a bill board in Alabama like their billboard in Florida. This is a link about the Florida billboard at...
-
The title of the essay is, "Time to Lose the Confederate Flag: Some Heresies for the Civil War Sesquicentennial," by Craig Silver....
-
I have contacted both of my U.S. Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn . The following is the automated reply from Cornyn and the...
No comments:
Post a Comment