Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1866-05-11
REORGANIZATION.

The propositions Of the Reconstr uction Com.
mittee will strike every thoughtful citizen al
perfectly reasonable. We agree with GEo WN
CURTIS, that they seem to justify the hope Of the
most truly intelligent and patriotic personsi,bai
Congress would propose no policy upon which
the whole Union party of the country, includ-
ing the President might not agree. Some con-
cessions Of opinion were inevitable upon all
sides. Those who held with Mr. THADDEus
STEVENS that there should TO be general coDfis-
cation, or with Mr.. SUMNER that impartial suff-
rage should be Immediately established through
out the country, or with the President that no
farther conditions whatever were necessary,
must have seen that the opinion of the country
did not support them, and that all must meet
upon some firm and moderate middle ground
such as the Committee now offer.
The objection to what is called the President 6
policy is plain and conclusive 1t is that, by
allowing the late rebel States to resume their
full relations Immediately, and without further
provision, those States would have actually
gained political power by the rebellion. This
gain arises from the fact that every colored man,
as slave, counted as three-fifths of a man in
the basis of representation but as freeman he
counts as fve-ffths. In q State like South
Carolina, therefore, where the cOlored popula-
tion is half or even more than half of the whole.
and where that half is disfranchised, every vo-
ter has practically twice the power of voter in
State like Connecticut This is absurdity and
injustice SO conspicuous as to demand instant
adjustment. Moreover, there are many of the
most faithful and liberty loving Union men,
who are the steady advocates of equal suffrage.
and who, under the circumstances, do not doubt
the entire competency of Congress to require this
or any other condition which might seem to it
necessary, but who doubt the wisdom of this
method, and question the expediency of such
requirement.
But we see no good reason for supposing that
all reasonable and patriotic men should not sim
cerely unite upon the propositions presented,
They have reference exclusively to national re-
lstions. They do not interfere in the State
economy, except in defense of national rights
They declare simply, in the first place, that no
State shall abridge the privileges of citizens of
the United States. Such proposition is its
ewH irresistible argument. A citizen of this
country should be equally citizen everywhere
in it this is plain, and therefore all his civil
rights as citizen of the United States should
be sacred wherever the national flag floats.
In the second place, whenever the elective
franchise shall be denied to any portion of the
Is k.ao l..
for crime or participation in the rebellion, the
basis Of representation shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such male cit
izens shall bear to the whole number of male
citizens not less than twenty-One years of age
In other words, if South Carolina shall choose
to disfranchise l0O, 900 of her citizens because
of their color, or New York shall choose to do
the same thing because of want of property,
than each of those States shall suffer in the na-
tional representation just in that proportion.-
This is strictly harmonious with the Presidents
expressed wish to base representation upon the
number of voters.
In the third place the Committee recommend
that until the 4th day of july 1870, four years
hence, all persons who voluntarily adhered to
the rebellion shall be excluded from voting at
nstional elections. This article we presume is
introduced to embOdy the Presidents desire
that "treason shall be made odious. and that in
the great work Of reorganization the late rebel
leaders "shall take back seats" In his frequent !
and vehement expression of that desire the
President unquestiOnably spoke for the loyalty
of the country. His sentiments are further in
corporsted in the proposed bill to render certain
OF these leaders ineligible to Office under the |
government of the United States. This propo-
siticn is the one which seems to us likely to oc-
casion most difference of opinion. That it is
in strict accordance with President Johuson's
frequent suggestions is true, but it is not essen
tial to the general plan and, seems to US, might
be safely omitted.
The fourth proposition is matter of course,
that neithes the United State. nor any State