 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 27th, 2007 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 831 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
First, re-read my previous post, because you misquote what I said. My posting says: "Feel free to present your source saying that either man felt that the Government SHOULD PURSUE THE CASE against Mr. Davis...."
What I said was that Mr. Dana's expressed opinion was that the Government should NOT pursue the case against Mr. Davis, which should be clear to anyone who reads the letter. Quoting from the letter, Mr. Dana wrote: "After the most serious reflection, I cannot see any good reason why the Government should make a question whether the late Civil War was treason, and whether Jefferson Davis took any part in it, and submit those questions to the decision of a petit jury of the vicinage of Richmond at: "nisi prius." To me, that is the: "Important point," not whether or not Mr. Dana thought that the Government had a : "Good" case.
Contrary to what you said in Posting #26, Mr. Dana DOES express serious doubts that the Government could successfully convict Mr. Davis of treason in a trial in Virginia.. This fact you continually seek to play down.
These doubts that Mr. Dana had could well have been one of the factors influencing Andrew Johnson's decision to issue the general amnesty four months later. When the letter reached the desk of Mr. Johnson, he wrote on it: "This opinion must be filed with care. A.J."
Last edited on Mon Dec 17th, 2012 05:44 am by Texas Defender