Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1866-06-13


and new governments have been established
in these States originating in an irregular
or revolutionary manner, that 1t Is the duty
of Congress, under the fourth article and |
fourth section of the Constitution, to see
that they are republican In form, and In
the discharge Of that duty, require such
conditions or guarantees as the safety OF the
Union, in their judgment, demands. This,
too, is objected to.
An honorable. gentleman from Pennsylva-
MIA at the other end of the Capitol, with
some self-conceit, as it seems to me, sets
down all these reconstruction suggestions or
theories as mere WITNESSES. He has plan
of his own to restore the Union and get rid
cheap in execution, He will execute it him
self with only the aid of constable When
ever rebel shows his head, he and his
constable will pounce upon him like Bu-
chanan marshal on flying negro. He will
put him where no rebel ever went before
with his consent-in the old Capitol Prison.
1t the honorable gentleman really thinks
that his plan is practicable, why does he
not set about its execution? ? His intended
victims swarm through the Capitol and
the White House, and two or three dozen
Of them are asking admission to Congress:
There are objections to this theory. Indeed
it has been tried. 1t was Buchanan s plan
for suppressing the rebellion but it failed.
Now, sir, the theory of the Opposition,
based upon the second and third sections of
the first article of the Constitution, under
which members from the rebel States are to
be admitted to these Halls without our
leave, is that the right of State to repre-
sentation cannot be forfeited or lost so long
as these two sections remain unaltered. Is
there no objection to this theory? Why, it
comedies the right of representation during
the whole war. Their members could have
entered this Capitol at any time and voted
As the interest of the Confederacy required.
If the war had lasted fifty years instead of
four the right would have run through all
that time. Nor would it have ceased if our
armies had been overpowered and the Con-
federacy left unmolested. After one hun
dred years of separation, they might still
vote for President and send members to
Congress. Unless you admit the doctrine
of forfeiture, you cannot avoid this conclu-
sion. Aside from this doctrine, nothing
but an amendment of the Constitution
could deprive them of this right. But the
Constitution could not be amended, because
these eleven States are more than one fourth
of the whole, and the assent of some of
them would be necessary tor any amend
ment; and to deprive them of Senators the
assent of every one would be necessary.
The advocates of this theory, to avoid
this result, cOncede that the right of repre-
sentation would be forfeited by success.
But how? The Constitution is not changed
by the result of battle There it is, Just
rs 1t was before If they lost nothing by
defeat would they by success? They lost
nothing by secession and unsuccessful war;
you say, because these were unconstitution-
al Can they lose anything, then, by victo-
ryp Would not that be unconstitutional al
SOP But we would acauiesce." Well,
suppose We should would not acquiescence
be unconstitutional and void? Where in
the Constitution are We authorized to ac-
quiesce In division OF the Republic? If
their ordinance Of secession was void would
not our consent to it be equally void? If
the ordinance was void can it be rendered
more so by defeat or less so by victory
Some OF the advocates of this theory, to
avoid this reasoning, concede that the right
of representation is forfeited or suspended
during 'contumacy. This cruel word to
characterize the great rebellion is not original
with me. 1t is the word maliciously chosen
by our conservative friends who are deter
mined to make treason odious. | wish the
printer to enclose it with inverted commas,
that such severity of language may not be
ascribed to me. But who is to decide when
the suspension begins and when it ends ?
The State? 1t so, that is no suspension at
all. A light that can be taken up and laid
down at pleasure cannot be said to be sus-
pended. Is Congress the Judge? Then l
submit that by secession from the United
States, by the formation of new Confede-
racy, by four years of terrible war and five
of scornful refusal, these States would be-
come little contumacious, and Congress
would be justified in suspending their rights
until the legislation necessary to make rep
resentation fair and equal could be agreed
upon and passed. And that is all that any,
body here proposes to do.
This appeal to the Constitution for au-
thority to hand the Government over to the
unrepentant plotters of its destruction is
but continuation of the policy pursued by
the Opposition for the last FIVE years. Du-
ring that period they have raised cry about
the Constitution many times, but always in
opposition to good measures or in advocacy
of bad ones. When it was first proposed
to coercc the rebellion and save the Union.
and at every following step toward apparent
success, they cried, unconstitutional" It
was unconstitutional to raise an army or
march it into the sacred soil of the South.
1t was unconstitutional to issue bills of cred
1t to meet the expenses. 1t was unconsti-
tuticnal to close a rebel port or arrest a reb
ell spy, to proclaim martial law in rebel
country, or to appoint provisional govern
or for conquered Louisiana or abandoned
Tennessee. Look back through the debates
of the Opposition; there is nothing consti-
tutional but slavery and rebellion, nothing
30 unconstitutional as coercion and enamel.
patton. Judging from these debates. the
Constitution was especially framed to re-.
press liberty, punish fidelity to the Union.
shield oppression, and honor treachery and
great crime. These war measures are ali
constitutional now. Great light is thrown