The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-09-19
Rival Houses.
From the Tribune,


The New York Times saw fit to warnits readers
of prospective collision between two rival
bodies, each claiming to be the House of Rep
resentadves. This collision was to be induced
as follows
A 1ull House of Representatives consists OF
two hundred and forty-one members, making
one hundred and twenty-one a quorum. OF
these the ten States which plunged into seces-
sion and rebellion, and have not yet been re-
habilitated are entitled say to fifty leaving one
hundred and ninety-one to the remaining States.
Let these States choose one hundred to one
hundred and ten Republican Unioniss, with
eighty to ninety conservatives" and the latter
tit was threatenedl would unite with the men
chosen from the lately insurgent States, making
a large quorum, and organizing by themselves
and, beng so organized, President johnson
would recognize this as the true House, ignor
ing that constituted by quorum Of the un.
questioned members as bogus, and thus inaugu.
rating anarchy ii not immediate civil war; And
this prospect Yves held out by the Times as a
reasont Tor choosing conservatives" to Congress-
1t seemed to us to afford the most coyent
reasons for an exactly opposite course. If those
who claim to be conservatives" propose to in
augurate anarchy and cival war; by defying the
laws OF the land, they surely ought not TO be
intrusted with power. For peace the great ma
jority insist on; and they know that peace is to
be maintained only by obedience to law. So we
repeatedly demanded that the editor of the
Times should declare, in case he shall be re-
elected 10 the House, which of the two contem-
plated Houses thus organized he proposes to
take seat in.
This question, after days of silence, he is
goaded into noticing; first, denying that he is a
candidate for the House (Which, though not
yet formally nominated, he is), and proceeding
to say
''But we have no wish to stand on etiquette
We presume Alr. Raymond, in the case in which
that Congress which should assemble IN accord
ance with existing law. He has thus far actec
in conformity to law, and has advised everybody
else to do the same; and we see nothing in the
condition or prospect of public affairs likely tC
induce OF incline him to DO otherwise"
Yes, SIR, but when you try to Fighter
people into electing conservatives by conjur
ing up prospect of anarchy and civil wal
through their organizing bogus Congress il
defiance of "eXisting law" you compel us to asl
how you propose TO act IN regard to such fresl
rebellion.
The ZHnes proceeds
''We desire, as we have already stated, to SCI
the danger and the possibility of such a con
fict OF authority as the one supposed entirel
aVerted.n
Very good; so do we. And the sure way {,
do this Is to elect an indisputabe quorum o
Republican Unionists. Only let us have l2l a
these returned land we have lao in the presen
House), and the new game OF secession
blocked-you can't make LOCUS House if 20
try. The fifty from unrestored States canno
Il
chosen from the loyal States to help them do il
So the way is clear to render the apprehende
conflict Of authority impossible.
The Times concludes as iollows:-
''We wish the present Congress would at ono
admit, or declare It's purpose TO admit, loyi
members from loyal States who can take th
oath prescribed by law. We believe it to be th
duty of Congress, If it proposes to be goyeIle
by the requirements of the Constitution, to tax
this course, which we regard, moreover, as be
ter calculated than any other 10 restore peaC
and harmony TO the Union, and to avert all I'll
perils which menace the country. Why do'
the Tribune oppose it?"
What the Times here asks is simply this:-
]. That Congress shall have no voice
settling the conditions of reconstruction an
the guarantees against future rebellions I'll
President has imposed such conditions as
thinks proper, and Congress must accept az