The weekly north Iowa times. [volume] (McGregor, Iowa) 1857-1867, 1866-09-19

that you and and all other republicans
who coincide with us, may act with refer
ence to the issue presented by the conven-
ton without affecting in the least our status
in the republican party. The principles
laid down by the convention meet my un-
qualified approval. and commend them
selves to my judgment sse no place for
those who desire the restoration of the
union, order, prosperity and equal rights,
except in the support of the administra-
ton us the representative of those princi-
pies.
STATEMENT OF THE POSITION.
1t seems to me the mere statement of
the position of the congressional party car
ries its own rcfutation. 1t assumes that
the late rebel states shall not be allowed
representation until they have given pledg-
es of security for the future, but congress
has failed to inform us what those pledges
are to be, or how the states are to give them.
If in answer to this statement it is claimed
that the late rebellious statement it is
claimed that the late rebellious states must
adopt the proposed constitutional amend
ments, then reply that the claim is false
and deceptive, for congress has in no man.
ner indicated to the country those states
would be admitted to representation when
they adopted the amendments. A bill was
introduced into congress declaratory of the
purpose of congress to adopted the amend
ments, but the radicals took good care that
it did not pass. Mr.. Allison will not claim
before the people of this district that it his
purpose, or the purpose Of the radicals, to
admit those states to representation upon
the condition only of their adoption of the
amendments, as he so stated publicly in
McGrcgor a few days ago.
1t may be claimed that the admission of
Tennessee established precedent under
which the other southern states will be ad-
mitted. In answer to this it is only neces-
sary to say that by the highest radical au-
thority, the New York Independent. Tenn
essee was admitted to make votes for the
radicals in the fall elections. and tina, mo-
tive was openly avowed in both houses Of
Congress. But that which is clear and
convincing upon thi. point is tha. the &C,
admitting Tennessee plainly makes that
state an exceptional case, and therefore no
precedent.
But why make the adoption of an amend
ment to the constitution of che southern
states condition to restoration. when it is
we'll understood that large number Of the
states that never were in rebellion. will in
dignantly and scornfully reject it. tits by
no means clear that the proposed amend
ments would be adopted if every one of the
rebellious states should rdopt them. 1t is
quite probable that there are ten states
which have never been in rebellion that
will reject those amendments.
The Chicago Tribune, in late number
has the following: "The republicans offer
to let the south into congress, with seventy
five members in the House and thirty-two
in the Senate, but the Copper-Johnsonites
declare that ten states of the south will not
come in unless the south shall have ninety
one seats in the House as well as thirty
two in the Senate" I suppose that the
Tribune coolly calculated while publishing
the above, that every false pretense that
can catch an unthinking voter, is fair
in politics. l have already shown that the
radicals have proposed no such thing as
the admission of southern representatives
upon any conditions, and if the late rebel
states should adopt to-day those amend
ments, the radical majority in congress
are in no manner committed to admit them
10 practlcal relatlOnS.
DISHONESTY OF CONGRESS-.
In studying the proceedings of the pre-
sent congress, it is difficult to avoid the
conviction that the radical members actu-
ally dreaded restored union, and cared
only to perpetuate their power. From the
beginning OF the war to its close, the peo-
pie of the United States were assured by
the most solemn declarations of the exc
cutive and legislative departments of tho
government, the army and the navy, that
the war was prosecuted not in spirit of
hatred and revenge, but solely to maintain
the supremacy of the constitution and
laws, and that when the insurgents sui
mitted to the authority of the government,
the war should cease, and they be restor-
cd to their rights and privileges as citizens
of the United States.
The theory of the government was that
a state could not 60 out of it's own accord
C- be excluded from the Union by the ac-
ton Of the other states. Mr. Lincoln used
this happy similitude, "a man and wife
may separate and voluntarily go out of the
presence of EACH other, but states cannot
go out of the presence of each other except
through successful revolution The rev.
olution was attempted but failed. The
millions of the masses of the misguided
rebels were instantly amnestied which the
radicals themselves admit was right, and
yet to-day they have denied to those eight
millions of the pardoned masses their
rights of representation, while requiring
for the support of the government.
&c 49, Il.
ne long and practice thus ungenerously
and unjustly with its people. The pre-
lenses urged in excuse of the suicidal poll
cy of the radicals are in keeping with the
policy. The first and most prominent is,
that we cannot trust the rebels. Why not
trust them? As before said the millions of
their masses were amnestied at the close
of the war which means both in the legal
and christian sense-full pardon of all Of
fences against the government of the Uni
ted States and restoration to all their
rights and privileges which the rebellion
had taken from them. And is not the
right of representation one of those rights
and privileges. If in answer to their prop
osition radical friend shall say that
while those masses are entitled to repre-
sentation they have no right to send dis
loyal men to Congress, then reply, that
my radical friends shall not be permitted
to escape through that bubble. Neither
the president or his friends claimed that
any member shall be admitted who can be
excluded under the constitution or any law
of the United States. In time Of pro-
found peace is it the proper way to pre-
pare the millions of the late rebels for
good loyal citizens of the United States to
heap abuse and insult upon them by tell
ing them they cannot be trusted in their
professions Of obedience to the laws. A
rebellioas son returns to his fathers home
promising to sin no more. The father re-
pels him with the insulting taunt, he can
not trust him. What is the judgment ola
well regulated mind of such q father?
But is this hate of the leaders of the
radicals houest and sincere, or mere pre-