New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1866-09-27
GIVING UP THE POINT.

radicals have issued an address in which they
bitterly assail the President, and attempt to
defend the congressional policy. In the
course of the address they say:
Is it charged that the action of the two houses
was tardy and hesitatng? Consider how momen-
tous were the questions involved, the issues de-
pending. Consider how novel and extraordinary
was the situation Consider how utterly silent
and blank is the federal Constitution touching the
treatment of insurgent States, whether during
their fragrant hostility to the Union or after their
discontinue. Consider with how many embar
! easements and difficulties the problem is beset,
and you will not wonder that months were re-
quired to devise, perfect, and pass, by two
thirds vote in either house, just and safe plan of
reconstruction.
When Mr.. Buchanan, in his last annual
message, assumed precisely this ground, the
Republicans declared that he had uttered o
heresy which, if it were admitted, would ut
terly undermine and destroy the foundations
on which rested the doctrine Of an indie
structible Union. They declared that nothing
was simpler than the manner in which insur-
gent, i. e., seeded States, should be treated ;
and that the Constitution made no provision
for this exigency, because the possibility of
disunion was not contemplated. To make
war upon the seeded States, as if they We're
merely insurgents against the Union, to re-
duce them to obedience to the Constitution
and to ignore the act of secession and all the
legal consequences of that act, was the course
suggested and the course pursued by the Re-
publican party. But the triumph of that
policy involved certain logical consequences
which the radicals now wish to repudiate
For instance the doctrine of the indestructi-
bility of the Union, now that war has ceased
necessarily involves the sequence that the
Union never has been dissolved and that the
Southern States are, legally, at this moment
in the Union, and entitled to representation
in Congress, just as much as if no attempt to
secede had ever been made
Hence the party are now driven to the
necessity of denying their fundamental doc
trine, and of admitting a proposition which
they had formerly denounced as heretical and
reasonable Their national committee can
find no other excuse for the assumption of
power on the part of Congress, to extrude
the Southern States from the Union, than that
the Constitution is utterly silent Eand blank
touching the treatment of insurgent States,
whether during this fragrant hostility to the
Union, Or after their discontinue"
But this avowal is pregnant with contradic-
ton of the whole course of the radical party,
whether in making war on the so-called insur-
gent States, or in assuming power, and ex-
elusive power over what is called the problem
of reconstruction. In both cases there is an
admitted usurpation of powers not granted by
the Constitution. The main difference be-
|
was, originally, founded on the variant views
entertained of the character of the govern
ment, and of the mutual relations of the
States and the United States. Whilst the Re
publicans assumed that the Constitution was
silent as to the treatment of ''insurgent
States" because the Union was, in its nature
| indestructible, and disunion beyond the range
of anticipation, their adversaries explained
this expressive silence of the fundamental
law on the theory that there could be no such
thing as an insurgency" of sovereignties
against co-equals, and that war waged upon
States by the federal government was too
great solecism on the nature Of our institu-
tons to be presupposed.
1t is a matter, perhaps, of no consequence
now, which party was right in these abstract
views. Practically the question has been set
tied in favor of the supremacy of the federal
government, and the suborclination of the
States. But it is worthy of note that, in order
to perpetuate a division which they had de-
clared to be impossible, and to Justify plain
usupation of the delegated powers, the sup
porters Of the Congressional policy now admit
that their war for the Union was unconsti-
tutional. The ayowal is made, ostensibIy, to
excuse delay Oh the part Of Congress, in ma
turing some practicable plan with which to
combat the Presidents enforcement Of the
doctrine of the continued integrity of the
Union; but the admission thus unguardedlv
made, is fatal to the pretensions Of Congress- |
1t is confession that the assumption of
power over a question-which indeed is made |
a question only by Congressional intolerance
and recusancy-is bold usurpation of au-
thority 1t is declaration that hereafter,
if the radicals succeed in enforcing their
views, there is to be no governmental power
in this country but the power Of a partisan
majority, in a dominant section, acting
through a legislative body uncontrolled by
any constitutional limitations whatever
The policy of President Johnson is entirely
free from any such objections. It does not
treat the question of reconstruction as one
requiring anomalous Legislative or executive
action, or justifying usurpation of powers not
granted by the Constitution. 1t gets rid of |
these difficulties by assuming that, as the
Union had never been dissolved, the Southern
States, now that the resistance of their popu-
lation has ceased, are legally members of the
Union, and, as SUCH entitled to representa-
ton in Congress. Any other theory, when
pressed to ultimate consequences, involves
violent change in the character of the gov
eminent, and its conversion into an agency
by which distastetul and even oppressive con-
ditions may, at any time, be forced on par
ticular States or sections.
OLD SoL-According to an old rule, which we |
believe has never been changed-no matter what /
the crcumstances-the sun crosses the equinoctia
line on the 2lst of September. This event will |
transpre to-day, if nothing happens to pre-.
vent it, Picayune.