Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1863-08-15
From tho Washington Chronicle.
T.rms of Re-AJmissIOn.

Before long some of the rebellious states
will be soliciting permission to re-enter the
Union, from which, in an evil hour, they Sc
coded. 1t is monstrously absurd to contend
that the constitution provides for, requires,
the reinstatement Of such people in all the
privileges which they enjoyed before their
suicidal secession; that the fundam ntal law
of the Union prohibits the impositlon Of any
condition upon those who, after violent, arm
ed and persistent efforts to destroy it, now
seek again to come under its shelter. let
this is really the ground taken by home SYM
pathizers with the rebels. They first affirm
that the federal constitution does not provide
for the deprivation of rebel state Of the
rights it possessed before it rebelled, and then
argue that what is not in terms authorized in
the constitution is in fact prohibited to the
government and people. Put into plain En-
glish, their position is this Rebellion may
be Il mistake, but is never crime; Il state
may secede, repudiate the federal cOnstitu-
ton and authority, just as long as it has any
hope of success, and, when convinced that 1t
must fall, return into the Union and resume
all its rights under the constitution, and its
full share Of blessings under the government
it has sought to overthrow; that, in fact DUR
ing the whole time it is in armed rebellion
against the constitution, it never loses its
right to the immunities aud protection Of that
great instrument.
We repeat, that this is monstrouSly absurd
doctrine. Yet it is the doctrine, stripped OF
its subtertuges, of the rebel sympathlzerS OF
the day. Ii it were sound Interpretation OF
the fundamental law in the case, perpetual
premium would be held out to attempts at
successful rebellion, inasmuch as state
could lose nothing by revolt, and might gain
territory, public property, independence. 1t
might get possession of the public lands, the
federal sub-treasuries, cust0m-houses, arse
nals, arm0rieS, and munitions of war within
its state lines, and the federal vessels within
its harbOrs, and relieve itself of federal taxa
ton. Success would give it all these. Fail
ure would be merely followed by the cap
ture of them, or of such OF them as had not
been destroyed. According to the rebel
sympathizers and the peace democrats. this
would be the only effect of failure. Neither
the government nor the people of the Union
could punish the offender, or impose any con-
dition upon the state before it was reinstated
III the Union, or even acting pledge that it
wOuld not repeat the offence. On the con-
trary, the senators and representatives could
take their seats in congress while inSultngly
declaring that they would try the expert
ment again the first favorable opportunity.
that this reading of the constitution cannot be
accepted as a solution OF the inquiry sugges :
ted in the first paragraph of this article. In
the view Of common sense, and common JUS
tee, and as an element vital to the republics
preservation, the government and the
people who have been so tUuy wrOuged by
the rebellion of the seeded states, must have,
if not Indemnity for the past" al least ''se-
curity for the future" The right to that is
inherent in every government. Place it
where you will, for that is immatera to the
argument, there IS a government Of this repu5-
l5c; and it is not only its inherent right, but
its imperative and sacred duty to obtain the
best security possible against a repetition of
this terrible tOray upon the country-this
fearful wreck Of property, and slaughter of
hundreds and thousands of citizens, to crafty
the greed Of ambition and the lust of power
OF wicked and designing men, backed by I'M
grateful and revolving states. Unless such
security for the future is provided, anarchy
only, not government, is our heritage. II
there be government then there must be
power to impose conditions on state that,
laying down its arms, seeks to be re-eStab-
lshed in the fellowship of the Union. Sure.
ly, If such thing can be devised, it ma take
bonds for the states good behavior. If ii can
not do this, it cannot take the first step toward
providing for its own preservation, and insur-
ing ''lite liberty, and the pursuit Of happi-
ness" to its citizens. Yet this would be nm
posing q condition., the right to impose a
condition includes the right to make one; and
then follows, in our Judgment, the right to
make and impose such condition as shall best
secure the OBJECT sought by its imposition.
We need not push the argument further at
present, or give it any specific application.