The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1867-07-24
1.-THE CHARLESTON DAILY NEWS AND
THE HON. B. HILL"

1.-THE CHARLESTON DAILY NEWS AND
THE HON. B. HILL"
In our issue of Monday we made few re-
marks on series of papers, by the Hon. B.
Fl. HILL, "Notes on the situation, and stated
that the premise, upon which his entire argu-
ment is based, is not admitted, and that in as
suminp that the Southern States had never left
the Union, and were, therefore, now as much
as ever in the possession of their rights under,
and entitled to the protection of, the Constitu-
ton, Mr.. HILL was begging the whole ques-
ton. The Charleston Mercury takes issue with
us on this point; and by way of proving the
contrary of our assertion, quotes the language
of the President, in his veto message, which,
however, it will have found in our issue OF
yesterday morning, we consider as no better
authority than the pse dirit of MIR. b. ID. HILL.
We did not discuss the abstract right of the
one opinion or the other; nor did We enter into
the merits of the question, regarding our pres
,ent status,-whether we are in the Union or
out of the Unien. We only contended that in
the opinion of the people of the North we are
not now States of the Union, nor entitled to
the rights, privileges and immunities guaran-
teed by the Constitution to citizens Of bona tide
States in the Union. President JOHNSON, we
scarcely need say, is not accepted by the
North as the accredited exponent Of its opin-
ions and views of the public policy, and least
of all in the matter 9f the reconstruction Of the
Southern States. In his veto messages he ar
cues as wide Of the mark, and as obstinately
refuses to recognize the inexorable logic Of
facts. as does Mr.. B. b. HILL in his ''Notes on
the Situation" and in the very long and angry
speech be made last week in Atlanta.
To quote Mr.. JoHNsoN's veto message in sup
port of the correctness of Mr. HILL's positions
is neither more nor less than arguing in cir
Gle. The same objection holds good against
the one and against the other. They have
both sworn fealty to the ghost Of the past, and
so entirely are they possessed of this spirit
fnot they only, but all those who think with
them, that they are blind to the signs Of the
times. They persistently refuse to recognize
the fact that the world moves, and that the
Constitution of to-day, the living soul ofthe gov
ernment, has altered in some essential psrticu-
lars lin spirit much more than in the letter.
from the document as known to our post-revo-
lutionarS sires.
That the Mercury is mistaken in thinking
that we did Mr.. HILL injustice, and that Mr..
JoHNsoN's view is to be accepted as the opin-
ion Of the North, will appear upon reference
to the debate which took place in Congress on
Friday last upon the question of the passage Of
the second Supplementary Reconstruction Bill
over the Presidents veto, published in The
News of yesterday. We have no desire to be
identified with the views advanced then and
there by Messrs. BUTLER, boutwell,, STEVENS,
WILLIAMS and others. But as'a question of
fact we would remind the Mercury that Mr..
STEVENS and Mr.. BUTLER this day stand higher
in Northern favor, and appear with greater and
more recent authority to represent the opin-
ions of the people than does President JOHN
SON.; Mr.. STEVENS has been uniformly con-
sistent in his course and opinions. He has been
an uncompromising Radical from the very be-
ginning, and probably the only man in the
House who, in fierce and unmitigated hostility
to us and our cause, has from first to last pur-
sued consistent course. The majority in
Congress are now adopting his views in order
to cover up, we presume, the inconsistency of
their acts of legislation.
Mr.. BUTLER answers the Presidents charge
of Inconsistency, quoted in the Mercury of yes
terday, and confutes his positions seriatim. He
says:
I desire to call attention to one or two
of the assertions in the message. l do 1t
not because they are new, but because never
here in this place 30 far as know, have they been
of Congress, have declared these State Govern
ments illegal with one breath, while with the other
we have sustained them; and he instances vari-
ous occasions where we have called them States
for matters Of Legislation, and argues that we have
constitutional amendment to be ratified by them.
I pray Judgment Of this House. Show me any
law or any section Of any law anywhere where
Congress has sent any one Of the constitutional
amendment to be ratified by one OF these states.
and his Secretary Of State taking advantage OF his
construction, has sent the constitutional provision
in reference to the abolition Of slavery to the 30
called States erected by Executive order and by no
other power whatever. +,
Again, he says that we have provided for, and
the Senate has confirmed, the appointment Of
Judges for these States. again take issue on the
fact We have provided for judges and district at
torneys Of the United States in certain districts
heretofore declared oy Law, and not for any State
United States soldiers and not for State officers.
Again, we are told in the same message that the
Supreme Court Of the United States has recog-
nized these States as States by assigning their
circuits and using their boundaries as convenient
designations. deny again the fact. The Supreme
Court has nowhere given any opinion or direction
on the subject, and that doctrine cannot be found
in it's action in any decree. Again, it s said that
the Supreme Court has recognized these States
from the fact that courts have been held there
q Court in the State Of North Carolina. To that
answer: He held Court in the Judicial district
of the United States, territorial district Of the
United States assigned to him under law without
any reference to the question whether the State OF
North Carolina was in existence or not; and it
would have been equally his duty to have held
that Court within the State, if North Carolina had
existence or not he held the Court in despite OF,
and not in subjection to, any supposed State law;
and among the first opinions he promulgated was
one which showed he by no means recognized the
State OF North Carolina except as q State that had
been in rebellion and was not yet brought back
into the Union. Nor has there been any recogni-
ton of them by the Supreme Court, because OF
that Court having allowed to be placed on its
docket cases brought from the various District
4 N;,o,,;t Hourfo Thaaa GnOrfa had undar fha
laws Of the United States, rendered certain judg
ments which were to be reviewed on appeal in the
Supreme Court Of the United States, and no where
had there arisen any place to adjudicate whether
these States were in existence or not, until the
State of Mississippi undertook to bring In Bill in
equity against the high United States officers:
And thereupon the Supreme Court Of the United
States made formal adjudication that the State
Of Mississippi, as State Of the Union, had no
standing in the Supreme Court of the United
States. So for from sustaining the doctrines Of
this message, it was directly and entirely opposed
to it.