Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1866-06-29
JUNE %, 1866.

aetion), for the special purpose Of chang
ing the existing state OF things, and restor-
ing civil government over the people. In
operation of this appointment new
Constitution was formed, a Governor and
Legislature elected under 1t, and the State
placed In the full enjoyment, or entitled
to the full enjoyment, of all her colt
stitutional rights and privileges. The con-
stitutional laws of the Union were thereby
enjoyed and obeyed, and were as binding
and authoritative over the people OF the
State as In any other portion of the coull-
try. Indeed, the moment the rebellion
was suppressed, and the Government grow
\. ing out Of IL subverted, the ancient laws
resumed their accustom' d sway, subject
only to the new reorganization by the APP
pDlntment. of the appropriate officer to
give them operation and effect. This re-
( organization and appointment of public
fuhcti0haTies, which was under the SUPER
intendence and direction of the President
y as commander-in-chi of the army and
navy Of the country. and who, as such, had
previously governed the State from i'm
perative necessity by the force of martial
law, had already taken place and the ne
cessity no longer existed" .'.s"1 '
Thisopinionist the more authoritative than
it might otherwise possibly be esteemed,
from its being the first elaborate statement
OF the reasons which governed the majori-
ty of the supreme Court at the last term IN
their judgment of the case of Miligan and
Others for the decision that military COM
missioners for the trial of civilians are not
constitutional. We submit that nothing
can be more conclusive in favor OF the doc
trlne for which they are cited than these
judgments. In the one the proposition Of
conquest Of State under a war to suppress
an insurrection Is not only repudiated by
Judge Sprague, but because Of the nature
of our Government it Is considered to be
legally impossible. THE right Of sover-
eighty over any portion of a State" will,
b he tells us, ''onIy be the same after the war
as IL was before" In the other we are told
that ''the suppression of the rebellion" re-
stores the rights of the StaCe, and that when
her Government is re-organized she is at
once In the full enjoyment of all her con-
stitutional rights and privileges.
Again,a contrary doctrine is inconsistent
with the obligation which the Government
is under to each citizen of a State. Pro-
lection TO each is part of that obligation; /;
protection not only as against a foreign,
but domestic foe. To hold that it is in
the power of any part of the people of a
State, whether they constitute majority
or minority, by engaging in insurrection
and adopting any measure in its prosecu-
: tiOn to make citizens who are not engaged
in it, but are opposed to it, enemies of the
United States, having no right to the pro-
lection which the Constitution affords to
citizens who are true to their allegiance, is
as illegal as 1t is flagrantly unjust. During
the conflict the eXigency may justify de-
NAL of spch protection and subject the un-
offending citizen to Inconvenience or loss /;
but the contest over, the eXigency ceases,
and the obligation 10 afford him all the i'm
munities and advantages of the Constitu-
ton Zone of which is the right to be repre-
sented in Congress) becomes absolute and
imperative. A different rule would enable
the Government to escape a clear duty and
to commit a gross violation OF the GOnsti-
tuition. 1t has been said that the Supreme
Court have entertained different doctrine
in the prize cases. This in the opinion of
the Undersigned is a clear misapprehensiOn.
One of the questions in those cases was,
whether, in such contest as was being
waged for the extnguishmentof the insur-
rectiOn, belligerent rights, as between the
United States and other nations, belonged
to the former. The court properly held that
they did, but the parties engaged in the re-
belliOn were designated In their opinion as
traitors and liable to be tried as traitors
when the rebellion should terminate. Ii
the Confederate States. by force of insur-
rectiOn, became foreign 5 ates, and lost
their character as States of the Union, then
the contest was an international one, and
treason was no more committed by citizens
of the former against the latter, than by
those of the latter against those of the
former. Treason necessarily assumes al
legiance to the Government, and allegiance
necessarily assumes continuing o0liga-
ton to the Government. Neither pre-
dcament was true, except upon the hy-
pOthesis that the old state of things con-
tinued; in other words, that the States,
Notwithstanding the insurrection, were cOn-
tinuously, and are now States of the Uuitsd
States, and their citizens responsible to the
Constitution and the laws.
Second. What is there, then, in the pres
sent political condition of such States that
iustifies their exclusion from representation
In Congress? Is it because they are with
out organized governments, or without
governments republican in point OF form?
In fact, we know they have governments
completely organized with legislative, eX-
ecutive and judicial functions. We know
that they are now in successful operation
no one within their limits questions their
legality or is denied their protection. How
they were formed, under. what auspices
they were formed, are inquiries with which
Congress has no concern. The right Of the
people of State to form government for
themselves has never been questioned. In
the absence of any restriction, that right
would be absolute; any form could be
adopted by them that they might deter
mine upon. The Constitution imposes bdt
a single restriction upon such right that
the government adopted shall be of "a re-
publican form"-and this is done in the OBJ
legation to guarantees every State such a
form. 1t gives no power to form Consti-
tuition for State. 1t operates alone upon
one already formed by the State. In the
words of the Federdlist mo. A. at sup
poses a pre-existing government of the
form which is to be guaranteed" 1t is not
pretended that the existing governments
of the States In question are not of the
required form. The objection is, that they
were not legally established; but it is con-
fidently submitted that that is matter
with which Congress has no concern. The
power to establish or modify State Gov
ernment, belongs exclusively to the people
of the State.l When they shall exercise it,
how they shall exercise It, what provisions
| lit shall contain, 1t Is their exclusive right
| to decide, and when decided, their decision
is obligatory upon everybody, and indie
pendent of all Congressional control, il
such government be of a republican form.
To convert an obligation of guarantee into
an authority to interfere in any way in the
formation of the government to be guaran-
teed, Is, to do violence to language. If it
be said that the President did Illegally in
terfere in the organization of such govern
ments theRnswers are obvious. First, If il
A l. - q.