How is it that a private citizen in the North during the Lincoln regime could be falsely arrested and carted off hundreds of miles away from his home by the local marshals and his deputies as described in the books American Bastile (1881) by John Marshall, and the Prisoner of State (1863) by Dennis A. Mahony, and reprinted by the Crowns Rights Book Co.?
How did this happen in the United States during the War Between the States? Weren’t the citizens protected by their God-given rights and “secured” rights in their respective State and National constitutions? In other words, what changed? What happened?
Many innocent citizens were falsely arrested, never knew the nature of the charges against them, never knew who their accusers were, when asked by these citizens by what authority that the arrest took place, none was given for the most part, no trials were given except occasionally a private citizen was taken before a military tribunal which was illegal and favored the national government in the outcome, and when finally released from these prisons hundreds of miles away from their homes, these prisoners still did not know what they had supposedly done wrong. What sort of government was in control at that time?
Just voicing a contrary opinion at a meeting or gathering, at a church sermon, or writing an editorial in the newspapers, etc., regarding the Lincoln regime’s usurpation of the constitutional government during the above-mentioned war could be justification utilizing “military necessity” to arrest citizens for their audacity to disagree in whatever manner, was sufficient to cause one to be arrested and carted off hundreds of miles away from their homes by the local authorities via the local marshals and his deputies. How could Lincoln and his men accomplish the use of arbitrary powers in placing innocent citizens in various prisons? Could Lincoln and his men execute the actual arrests without the assistance of the local marshals and his deputies? Could this be called “obedience to authority?”
Between 1961 and 1962, Stanley Milgram, who was working on his Ph.D, conducted some research at Yale University regarding the concept of “obedience to authority” which is available at Amazon.com for further reading. A film of this study can be obtained at some universities, and I actually viewed this film at the University of Maine in the 1980’s.
A newspaper ad was placed in the local newspaper offering $4.50 (minimum wage was very, very low then) for someone to come in and participate in an experiment for just one hour. The person, who showed up, was greeted by a rigid looking man in a white coat which indicated some “authority.” The recipient was told that there would be a “learner” and a “teacher” of which he would be the “teacher” which actually turned out that he was the “learner” but he wasn’t told this.
Before the experiment would take place, the recipient was introduced to the “learner”, and shook hands with him. He was told that the “learner” would be in an adjoining room, and would be strapped down with an electrode fastened to his arm.
The “teacher” was then taken to another room where he would sit in front of a generator that had 30 switches in 15 volts increments ranging from 15 volts to 450 volts. Each switch was clearly labeled indicating a rank pertaining to different zones as it relates to a danger zone to increased severe shock so there were no secrets regarding what the switches executed.
The last two switches were labeled XXX to show the “teacher” that these two switches were different from the others and execution of these switches meant a fatal result. The “teacher” was then instructed by the man, who wore the white authoritative coat, that he would be asking the “learner” some questions, and if the “learner” failed to give the correct answer, then he was to zap the “learner” increasing the voltage each time. In reality, the “learner” is NEVER zapped so, therefore, no harm ever came to the “learner,” but the “teacher” was not informed of this.
As the experiment progressed, some of the “teachers” would ask the authoritative man who would be responsible, if any detrimental results occurred. When the man with the white coat told them that he would take full responsibility, then most of the “teachers” would continue shocking the “learner” at increasing shock levels, even though some of them experienced some uncertainty regarding this. Some of the “teachers” outright quit the experiment. For those “teachers,” who were hesitant to move on to bring about the increased voltage, the experimenter would just move closer in terms of space to the “teachers” to see what they would do.
As more and more studies continued regarding the “obedience to authority” experiments, the studies showed that two thirds of the participants (the teachers) indicated that they were “obedient” subjects.
When the local marshals received a telegram from Washington, D.C. with such authoritative sounding words as Secretary of War Simon Cameron or Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton giving orders to arrest so and so, what do you think they did? Did the local marshals question on what grounds to arrest these citizens? Did the local marshals request the evidence such as affidavits proving the “wrongs” against the United States by those individuals so named? What did the local marshals actually do?
As stated in the above-mentioned books, the arrests took place in the middle of the night or in the early morning hours, whereby the marshals and his deputies surrounded the homes of those innocent citizens, entered their homes illegally and/or snatched their private papers, falsely arrested those citizens, and carted them off hundreds of miles away from their homes. In some cases, some citizens were lured out of their homes by the use of deceptive practices on the part of the marshals and his deputies stating that someone important needs to speak with them immediately and to meet that person at some office somewhere in town.
Weren’t the marshals knowledgeable regarding the constitutional amendments, for example, the the fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth amendments of the Constitution of the United States? Wasn’t it their duty to know of these secured rights? What about the State constitutions and the secured rights of the citizens mentioned in those? What about God-given rights? Did any of these rights matter to the local marshals? Obviously not! They received “orders” from some authority source, and obviously they didn’t seem to question anything; they just obeyed. Now, were there any benefits to obeying? Would there be some consequences to disobeying “the” authority figure? Think about that for a moment.
As further described in those books, some of the marshals actually knew some of those citizens personally, but did that stop the marshals and his deputies from falsely arresting those citizens? No, not at all. Were the marshals and his deputies participating in “obedience to authority” after all? Yes, they were.
What about the locals in your area such as the probation officer, the police officer, the sheriff, the mayor, the internal revenue employee/official, the attorney general of any State, etc., what would they do, if given certain orders by an authority figure? Would any or all of them participate in “obedience to authority” at the detrimental effects of its innocent citizens? Think about that for a moment.
In closing, are the Nazis any different than Americans in this respect? Keep in mind that the Nazi regime came about AFTER the War of Northern Aggression by Lincoln and his men. Do you suppose that the Nazis learned some lessons from the Lincoln regime regarding the use of deception and arbitrary powers? Maybe?
November 2, 2004
