TEXAS V WHITE 74 U.S 700 1869 TEXAS V WHITE U.S CONSTITUTION U.S GOV'T JUDICIAL CIVIL WAR U.S GOVERNMENT AND CONSTITUTION SIGNIFICANCE IN THIS CASE THE SUPREME COURT RULED ON THE LEGALITY OF FINANCIAL ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT OF TEXAS THE COURT RULED THAT TEXAS'S SECESSION FROM THE UNION DURING THE CIVIL WAR WAS ILLEGAL THEREFORE WHILE TEXAS HAD NOT BEEN FORMALLY READMITTED TO THE UNION IT WAS STILL PART OF THE UNION AND COULD APPEAL TO THE SUPREME COURT IN ADDITION THE COURT STATED THAT CONGRESS HAD THE RIGHT TO PROVIDE PLANS FOR RECONSTRUCTION BACKGROUND IN 1851 CONGRESS AUTHORIZED THE TRANSFER OF 10 MILLION WORTH OF UNITED STATES BONDS TO THE STATE OF TEXAS THE BONDS WERE PAYABLE TO THE STATE AND WERE TO BE REDEEMABLE IN 1864 DURING THE CIVIL WAR THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT OF TEXAS HAD SOLD THESE BONDS IN ORDER TO PAY FOR THE WAR EFFORT AFTER THE WAR THE TEMPORARY RECONSTRUCTION GOVERNMENT SUED TO REGAIN THE BONDS GEORGE WHITE AND THE OTHER DEFENDANTS WERE THE BUYERS OF THE BONDS WHITE ARGUED THAT TEXAS COULD NOT SUE HIM BECAUSE THE STATE HAD NOT OFFICIALLY BEEN READMITTED TO THE UNION THE STATE HAD NOT FULFILLED CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FOR READMISSION INCLUDING RATIFYING THE THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS DECISION THIS CASE WAS ARGUED ON FEBRUARY 5 AND FEBRUARY 8 9 1869 AND DECIDED ON APRIL 12 1869 BY A VOTE OF 5 TO 3 CHIEF JUSTICE SALMON CHASE SPOKE FOR THE COURT JUSTICE ROBERT GRIER DISSENTED CHASE ARGUED THAT THE UNION WAS PERPETUAL OR CONTINUOUS AND THEREFORE A STATE COULD NOT SECEDE THE COURT RULED THAT THE REBELLION HAD BEEN ILLEGAL AND HAD LEFT TEXAS WITHOUT A LAWFUL GOVERNMENT THE ACTIONS OF THE CONFEDERATE GOVERNMENT WERE CONSIDERED VOID IN ADDITION SINCE THE GOVERNMENT PUT IN PLACE AT THE END OF THE WAR HAD BEEN RECOGNIZED BY CONGRESS THE STATE REGAINED ITS RIGHTS THE COURT AFFIRMED THAT TEXAS COULD SUE AND SHOULD REGAIN ITS BONDS EXCERPT FROM THE OPINION OF THE COURT THE UNION BETWEEN TEXAS AND THE OTHER STATES WAS AS COMPLETE AS PERPETUAL AND AS INDISSOLUBLE AS THE UNION BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL STATES THERE WAS NO PLACE FOR RECONSIDERATION OR REVOCATION EXCEPT THROUGH REVOLUTION OR THROUGH CONSENT OF THE STATES CONSIDERED THEREFORE AS TRANSACTIONS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION THE ORDINANCE OF SECESSION ADOPTED BY THE CONVENTION AND RATIFIED BY A MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS OF TEXAS AND ALL THE ACTS OF HER LEGISLATURE INTENDED TO GIVE EFFECT TO THAT ORDINANCE WERE ABSOLUTELY NULL THEY WERE UTTERLY WITHOUT OPERATION IN LAW OUR CONCLUSION THEREFORE IS THAT TEXAS CONTINUED TO BE A STATE AND A STATE OF THE UNION NOTWITHSTANDING THE TRANSACTIONS TO WHICH WE HAVE REFERRED AND THIS CONCLUSION IN OUR JUDGMENT IS NOT IN CONFLICT WITH ANY ACT OR DECLARATION OF ANY DEPARTMENT OF THE NATIONAL GOVERNMENT BUT ENTIRELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WHOLE SERIES OF SUCH ACTS AND DECLARATIONS SINCE THE FIRST OUTBREAK OF THE REBELLION
