Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1866-05-03
ORGo Statesrllral'r,
A Candid survey of the Political
FmImre-TrOnbIes Ahead.
From the Auburn IN. W Advertiser 4 Union

From the Auburn IN. " Advertiser q Union
(kepublican) April25.l
We had occasion to state in our issue of
yesterday, that any further indemnity for
the expenses of the war than we have al
ready received, is out of the question.
Security for the future is the subject now
uppermost before Congress and the
country.
In respect to this the firstquestion which
arises is, t1Itether Congress possesses any poUer
tctdteUer TO erlct from the late rebels any Secu-
rtty for their future behaUior. To consider this
Alright, we must first settle in our minds the
precise status of the rebels as members of
their respective States, and whether there
exists any way of obtaining security from
them as individuals. So far as the paroled
soldiers are concerned, it seems to be ad-
mitted that there is not. All other rebels
might be arrested and put under recogniz-
ance to keep the peace If it were not for the
Amnesty Proclamation, which extends a
pardon to some of them. A few of their
leaders are now under arrest for suspected
completely in the assassination OF President
Lincoln, and for treason, and may yet be
tried with the view to punishment. But
in looking over the whole subject, neither
the President nor Congress haze found any
feasible constitutional 10dy TO exact any security
from them that they l0W not rebel again Dhen
opportunity offers. So we dismiss that idea
from consideration as being of no practical
account. No security will be, because il
cannot be, eXacted of them as individuals.
The eneXt question which arises is whether
any security can be obtained from them in
their collective capacity as members of
their respective States. And here we must
consider that these States are acknowledge
ed and proclaimed to be inside the Union
under the Constitution, although some Of
their functions are suspended by the pecu-
liarty of their situation. They are within
the Union yet in certain respects, although
out of ther proper practical relations to the
Government. This being their condition,
is there any way in which the Federal Gov
ernment can exact any formal guaranty
from these States that their inhabitants
will never again rebel? We suppose not, e1
cept through an amendment TO the Constitution,
and no such amendment WOuld be likely to be
ratifed By three-fOurthS Of the States. We
dismiss that idea also as one of no practical
account.
This brings us to the consideration of the
question whether any security can be eX-
acted by indirection as a logical result of
any practical line of policy toward them.
1t has been suggested that since there APP
pears to be no way to exact security for
future behavior by direct means, they shall
be denied representation in Congress and
in National Conventions until they so
amend their State Constitutions as to de-
clare the Union OF States to be perpetual.
This idea seems to obtain favor with those
who are without faith in those who have
been rebels.
Those who, like Judge Shellabarger, of
Ohio, continue to believe that the rebels
h., oil fn al 70 in hn
ernment, and that ''nO good thing can come
out OF Nazareth" maintain another posi-
ton, namely:
l. That the people of the Southern States
shall be excluded from representation in
Congress and participation in political
councils until after the next Presidential
election. .....
2. To exclude the entire Southern vote
for President and VicePresident, upon
the precedent established by Congress in
the last election.
8. II the Southern and Northern DEM
ocratic vote together should elect Presi-
dent ito be prepared to resist that election.
Upon this the Democratic party Of the
country haze already taken issue 1otth the ap-
parent hope Of making 10 successful.
The point we are discussing is indirect
security for the good behavior of the rebels
in the future. The question is whether
this line of policy, if it shall be followed,
will be likely, in view of the issue already
made upon it, to secure it. We haze seen no
reason for believing that ii toiU. The key
note to the probable solution may be dis
covered in the testimony of Alexander H.
Stephens, of Georgia. He said distinctly
that the Southern people had complied with
all the terms originally offered them, and
all which Congress had the right to impose
that they would not accept Others as con-
Gitions precedent to admission into Con-
gress. 1t is reasonably certain that they
consider themselves within the Union, and
in practical relations to the Government
which entitle them to representation in
Congress and in political conventions.
1t is reasonably certain that they will
send delegates to the next national nomin-
ating conventions, and that the Democratic
nominating convention will admit them.
It's reasonably certain, moreover, that they
will choose Electors of President and Vice.
President, and ask to have them canvassed,
and that If the electoral UOtes Of Southern and
Northern Democrats together are enough TO elect
President and Vice President, and they
are not dlloUed there l1iU be a political trouble
of UeryJormidabIe character. With john
son for President at that time in command
of the military forces, it cannot be reason
ably expected chat the candidates elected
will or can be kept out of Office.
We are free to say that we cannot con-
template such contingency without the
deepest concern. When we apply to this
subject the logic of our own observation
and experience of political campaigns in
by-gone years, we are obliged to conclude
that such an experiment will result in
trouble, without any corresponding benefits