Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1863-09-04


vsIandiehann,s hypocrisy.
The stereotyped phase used by Vallandig-
ham in all his speeches, s, "the Union as IL was,
the Constitution as II is" II would seem 10 be
a work ofsupererogation to multiply evidence
showing that Vallandighams profession that he
is in favor of restoration ofthe Union as il was
is a mere pretense, but there is evidence Of that
fact which has been entirely overlooked by edi-
tors and speakers Probably this oversight is
owing to the fact that the evidence we refer TO
was furnished by Vallendigham Just at the close
Of the late session. aud the bill to which we shall
call attention. but little debated, besides the
journal of the last session, and the bound Con.
gressonal Globe, have but lately been issued
and distributed.
We refer to Vallandighams course upon the
bill providing for the election Of Congressman
in the States Of Tennessee aud Louisiana. VAL
llandigham's course on that'bill showed that his
aim was to embarrass and defeat all measures
calculated TO aid the return of the rcyolted
States to the old government. The bill referred
to was in its detail, prepared by Mr.. Worcester,
of the Huron district aud il met the approval Of
Maynard, Clement and Bridges, members from
Tennessee besides Etheridge, Clerk of tho
House. and other loyal Tennesseeans, all of
whom were very anxious IL should pass. That
bill Vallandigham opposed at every step in the
House, and would have been enabled to defeat it
there, had he been in his seat when Mr.. Dawes
asked unanimous consent to call the bill up
What Vallandigham did, coming in few min
utes after Mr.. Dawes had succeeded in getting
the bill before the House, shows that he would
not have consented to the calling up of the bill
had he been in his seat little earlier.
4 But we find the history of this matter given
in the NOrwalk reflector, over the signature OF
.I"W," and we infer the the article was prepared
by Mr.. Worcester, who, as we before remarked,
had the framing of the details Of the bill as one
of the Committee on Elections.
We beg close attention to the article, which is
as follows Cleveland HcraId.
at is pretended that Mr.. Nallandigham and
those with whom he was IN sympathy and COM
lplicity, wished to restore the Union as it was.-
Never was there more arrant and inpudent hy-
pocrisy. His purpose has been and still is to
promote secession, aud to prevent a restoration
1 of "the Union as IL Iods." That such has been
and still is his purpose, no testimony can be
more conclusive than his action and votes on the
bill introduced into the House Just before the
close Of the last session, to provide for the cleo
tion of members of Congress, under the census
of 1860, in the States of Tennessee and Louis
lana, as they appear in the Congressional Globe,
Sd session, 37th Congress, vol. 3 PIP ,493, 464.
That bill was originally introduced into the
House by Mr.. Maynard, of Tennessee, to pro-
vide for elections in that State only and on his
motion referred to,the Committee ON Elections.
That Committee, having revised the original
bill unanimously reported it back, with an
amendment introduced by Mr.. Hahn, OF Louis
lana, extending its provisions to that state On
the I'd of March, Mr.. Dawes, Chairman OF the
Committee on Elections, obtained the unani-
/ nous consent of the House to report back the
bill from the Committee, with instructions from
that Committee to recommend its passage, Mr..
r V. at that moment not being in his seat. MIR.
", upon coming in soon AFTER made objection
to the introduction of the bill, but found HIM
self too late to defeat it in that manner, as he
I IL. Ia.
had been in the House at the time it was intro
duced. As it was, he violently and bitterly OPP
posed its passage under the pretext that it pro-
vded that if a person who offered to vote should
be challenged for disloyalty, his vote should be
D rejected unless he would take an oath to sup
r port the Constitution of the United States.
The bill, however, passed the House, not
withstandng the opposition of Mr.. V. by vote
of l04 yeas to 81 nays fire Democrats, all the
, Republicans, and all the Border State men then
in the House voting for it, except Henry May,
the rebel-sympathiser OF Baltimore; and May,
Conway, of Kansas, and 25 Democrats, includ-
ing Vallandigham, Ben Wood and Warren p.
Noble, voting against it. The bill went to the
Senate the same day it passed the House, was
! referred to the Judiciary Committee of that bo-
dy, who reported unanimously in favor of its
; passage. This was the last day of the Session
and the bill failed to become law, partly ow-
ing TO want of time, and partly TO the factiOus
and persistent opposition OF two or three cop
; perhead Senators. See Congressional Globe
: Sd Session, 37th Congress, Vol. 2, pages 1923
1924, 1880.
e There was no bill that came before the last
Congress, for the passage of which loyal men o.
Tennessee and Louisiana, both within and out
of Congress who knew about its provisions
were more united or so earnest and anxious
, Had it become law, as it would have done but
for the opposition of Mr.. Vallandigham, Ben
; Wood, Noble, and such as Mey, the States OF
Tennessee and Louisiana would have had near
, ly if not quite, their full number of Represen-
tatves on the floor of the next Congress. No
act that it was competent for Congress to have
passed could have done so much as the bill in
question to have re-nstated those States, so far
as they were concerned, "iR The Union as Il 1cas "
and to have satisfied the loyal people of the
other rebel States of the disposition of Congress
and the people of the loyal States TO aid them
in their restoration to the old Government As
itnow is, there is no State law in either of those
! States, under which Congressional elections car
:, be held, nor any law of Congress for that pur-
pose. With this evidence before him of Mr..
VS. votes and action upon the bill in question
what sane man, partisan though he may be, will
have the boldness to pretend that Mr.. V. irdS
or Is in favor of "the Union as it was" Or what
man of common sense common candor can
for moment doubt that his purpose is and has
bean to embarrass and defeat the restoration OF
"the Union as it was" and to compel the ac-
acknowledgement of what he and the rebels call
the Confederate States. W.