The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-11-10
The Ground of Southern Opposition to the
Amendment.


vote which was to all intents and purposes
unanimous. As the groundwork on which
they base their action the Committee on
Federal Relations submitted report, of
which the following is the substance -
First. That the States of the United state,
alone are authorized to consider Constitutional
amendments
"Second. That such amendments must be
proposed to Congress by the Legislatures OF
twO-thirds of the States.
Third. That Georgia was one of the original
States, and must always have continued such
unless she reserved the right TO secede, or gave
the Federal Government the right to eject her.'
The argument then goes on to declare that
Georgia and the other States are integral
parts OK Congress; and no constitutional
Congress can be convened while such fnte-
gral portions are forcibly' excluded. 1t SAYS
the adoption of the emancipation amend
ment was no precedent for the adoption OF
this, the Southern States having at that time
no delegation to be received into Congress,
as now, when denied admittance. 1t con-
cluees by saying that, as the amendment in
question was not proposed by two-thirds of
the constitutional Congress, the committee
recommends the adoption of the resolution
above given.
1t will be noticed that the cause for the
refusal to ratify has not been found in any
injustice on the part of the conditions pro-
posed, but merely on the illegality OF the
manner in which they were submitted. No
one is prepared to deny the first assertion.
In regard to the second statement, we do not
understand very definitely what it means.
The Legislatures of two-thirds of the States
do not propose amendments to Congress. On
the contrary, two-thirds of Congress must
propose them to the States. Let us look.
however, principally at the deductions as set
forth in the third place.
We "grant that Georgia was one of the
original States;" but we deny that Georgia
as it stands to-day is the same Georgia which,
in 1850, ratified the old Constitution. The
chain OF continuity has been broken. In
1884 all the officers and all the people of the
old State forswore their allegiance to the
United States. For four years they main
tanned by force OF arms their independence.
During that time all OF the officers elected
under the laws recognized by the United
States had ceased to be officers by the expi-
ration OF their terms of office. Supposiug even
that some OF them had been loyal, and were
loyal public servants, they would have gone
out Of Office by the time for which they we're
elected having passed. So that when the
Rebellion was subdued in Georgia, the old
State had no officers and no citizens. There
was no Legislature, no Governor, no Sherifs,
no public officials of any kind. The citizens,
by her rebellion, had also forfeited their lives
their property. and all their rights No one
will deny that, had the Government seen fit,
it had perfect right to conf1scate all South
ern property, aud execute or exile any Rebel.
The State OF Georgia was, therefore, in 1866
name, not reality; an essence, not
a creation. A number OF people in
habited the territory called Georgia
but no more constituted the old State
than did the Normans, when they had
subdued England continue the old Saxon king
doms intact. In this extremity, the Presi-
dent of the United States proceeded to recon
stract, not restore, the States. He did so by
virtue of his power as commander of the
army. His action was a military necessity,
and his newly created States were no more
States, legally, than is an army Congress
sional district. Before these new creatures of
the Executive will could be entitled to civil
rights and representation, they must be re-
cognized by Congress. With the Legislative
power rests the right to recognize new States;
and, to all intents and purposes, these recon-
structed States are new Commonwealths.
Congress has not yet recognized them, and
until it does, they are not equal States, en-
titled to ali the rights Of their loyal sisters.
II this argument be true, the State Of
Georgia, which is now proceeding to deblare
itself the old State founded in 1776, is not
that State at all, by creation which dates
back into the summer of 1865, and which was
formed by the action of but one branch of
the Government of the United States. AS
such, it had no right to be allowed voice in
the adoption OF the Constitutional amend
ment; and that its ratification is asked is
rather that we may have a pledge from her
OF her loyal spirit than that her assent is
necessary to make the amendment the SUI
preme law of the land. If this be true. then
why submit the amendment to the Southern
States at all? We answer, simply, that SO far
as its being a law is concerned, we do
not deem that their assent or refusal has any
thing to do with the matter. But it is an
inchOate contract, one which does not go into
orce, so far as one party is concerned, until
thu" assent of that party is secured. When a
10vv l.. frNfn fhn IInfAa