The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1864-05-12
CONGRESSIONAL.
Treatment of the Rebelli9uS
StateS-SOldier'S HsOmesteadS Oh
COnGscated Lands.
WASHINGTON May 4.

WAsHINGToN May 4.
The House resumed the consideration OF
the bill guaranteeing a republican govern
ment to the rebellious States
Mr. cox, of Ohio, commenced his speech
by saying: Ny hearts desire and prayer
to God is for peace in this desolated land.
While urging undiminished and increased
exertions of our army and navy to secure
7 the Union, / have been ever ready to heal
the wounds and check the ravages of war
by all rational methods used among civili-
zed nations. To those who can entertain
but one idea at a time, this position has
seemed inconsistent; but, to those who
have read history, it will appear that, to
check strife and restore harmony in civil
or international conflict, negotiation and
friendliness are indispensable He had
mournfully, though constantly, both by
voice and vote, upheld the sword, lest even
worse alternative, eternal separation and
prolonged strife, should be our fate. The
miseries which this war has entailed have
not been the work of the northern democ-
racy; and if disunion comes through the
open doors of Janus,-if. recognition Of
southern independence comes through war
or it, -disasters,- democracy are not
responsible for the odium, and, with my
word and aid, shall never be held respon-
sible. Five months have gone since the
amnesty proclamation was issued, but we
see no signs Of thousands of southern cti-
zens rushing to embrace the amnesty. In
deed, it is conceded that the rebellion is
now more Formidable Unlike the acts Of
grace granted by Kings to their recreant
subjects, there is no general taking Of the
oath, no genuine movement toward the
restoration OF the seeded States, but "a
fierce spirit Of resistance. produced by the
unwise and exasperating policy OF the Exc
cutive There is one chief defect in the
Presidents plan, in the structure built up
on his proclamation of emancipation. The
sane defect is observable in the bill of the
gentleman from Maryland (Ir Davis -
That, too, is based on the onc-tenth sys-
tem,-ihe policy OF forced emancipation.
He proposes to guarantee to certain States
whose governments haze been usurped or
overthrown arepublican form Of govern
ment This is the til- Of the bill. MIR.
Cox, in opposing Il, denied, first, that these
State governments are oyerthrown; and,
second, that his plan substitutes repub-
lican form. This plan is to appo.nt pro
visional Brigadler Generals, who are to be
charged with the civil administration until
a State government shall be recognized as
this bill provides. He requires an oath
to the constitution to be taken, which is
very well; but by whom? BY onc-tenth Of
the people. They shall be sufficient to
construct the new State, whose republican
form Of government is already dictated to
them by the bill Of the gentleman from
Maryland. They shall abolish slavery;
then the other steps are to be taken, and
the new republican State is to he recog-
nized in some Of its features This bill is
an Improvement upon the rickety estab-
lishment proposed by the President, but it
is obnoxious to the same objection. 1t is
usurpation of the sovereignty of the peo-
pie by the Federal functionarics, and it re-
CARDS the old States as forever destroyed.
Mr. Cox argued that both plans are objec-
tionable, because of the mode of construc-
ton, and the kind Of fabiic to be rebuilt
lu the course of hisremarks Mr.. Cox said:
The fact that war has come. and that sep
aration is impossible, makes more urgent
the ascendency Of i party whose first and
only preference is for the Union through
compromise, who shall at length be allow
ed to try the experiment Of reconcilinG the
States by guarantees similar to those pro-
posed in 1861. If it be found impossible
to restore the old association Of States by
such negotiations, then, and not till then,
can craftsmanship begin properly to ponder
the other problems connected with subju-
ton and recognition. tie reg fettcd that
any one, especially his colleague (Mr
Long,, should have anticipated these ques-
tions and expressed his preference between
the alternatives of war of subjuaation
and recognition Of southern indepond-
ence. He regarded either alternative as
prematures We may yet, he said, change
the war from'the diaboic purpose of those
in power, by changing that power to other
hands; and We are not to sever our Union
while that hope remains. OF two evils
subjugation or recognition, he made choice
of neither He proceeded at length tc
show how the Union might be restored by
reaching the individual South, and gave
illustrations from history where statesman.