Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-08-19
AUGUST 19,, 1867.


is the property only of that substantive
power, of that power bound by the Con-
stltution, and that power alone is governed
by the Constitution, but does not extend |
for any purpose Into any territory or con-
quered provinces. Why, then, talk about |
the Constitution regulating the action of |
Congress in a province, in territory, in |
conquered State, whether CONQUERED from
a legitimate State or an illegitimate State
may be asked howiiwe would treat the |
Confederate States of America? Just as |
Congress chooses. They ARE OUR PROPERTY /; |
their citizens are our subjects. THEIR LIVES, |
THEIR LIBERTIES, ARE SUBJECT TO THE
SUPREME WILL OF THIS BODY."-Cohgressio |
al Globe, 40h Congress, p 545. 6.,,.-.,ft.s..,,
Here, then, my fellow -citizens, we have
the two phases of Republication upon this
great and all-absorbing question of the
Union of these States; the one held during
the war, and the other adopted since. The
idea of Stevens, carried into this bill, for
the indiscriminate punishment of ten mill
lions of people, is one OF the most nefari-
GUS schemes of cruelty and wrong, and of
usurped power, that was ever suggested by
political vengeance. He boldly asserts
that Congress holds in the hollow of its
hand the life of every white man I'M the
South ] Did Nero, or Caligula, or Robes
pierre claim mere? And this is the kind of
Government, is it, which Washington, and
Franklin, and Jefferson, and Madison put
in operation in 17S7? No, no, my friends,
not, ,that-not that. .-rf asr- ,-s,.-7.7, ,I-;.,-
| Now, fellow citizens, If it is true that
there is no constitutional right for any one
or more States to secede from the Federal
Union,t as contradistinguished from the
common right of revolution for good cause
Fexisting, which is a natural right inherent
In the people OF all governments; then all
the ordinances of secession were mere pa
per nullities, and wholly and utterly void;
and the Southern people, having failed to
withdraw their States and form and main
tain. a new government, By force OF arms, it
follows as logical conclusion, that the
States in rebellion never were: practically
out of the Union. The question may be
stated in this wise: the Union is either dis
solved OF it Is not dissolved. These South
ern States, in their political character of
States, are either In or they are out of that
Union, as a constitutional fact. They can
not occupy both positions at one and the
same time, any more than material body
can occupy two portions of space at one
and the same time. This is the inevitable
tlogic of the problem, if we admit,
as we must admit, that there are but
two modes, outside of mutual consent, by
which they can get out at all, o.wit: byse-
cession, if they have the constitutional
right to secede: or by force of arms, in a
lrevolation prosecuted to successful ter
mot. If this position is correct, and
il, was, in effect, = the clear and
idistinct position of President Lincoln
and his Cabinet in the conduct OF the war,
by what authority, or by what show of
reason or constitutional, power, can Con-
gress deny to these ten Southern States re-
presentation in the councils OF the govern
ment? Their power of rejection, 50 far as
they have any such power, is clearly and
explicitly defined in the Constitution itself
1t is only by virtue OF that instrument that
Congress itself exists. That power applies
solely to members and not to States. II
touches only the personal qualifications o.
indiuidudls, and not the political qualifica-
tion of States, in their capacity of confed-
1erated sovereignties. The law of a common
commercial partnership between individu
ais, although there is no comparison be-
tween the two cases in dignity and impor
tance, will aptly enough illustrate the ques
4 ton. Any one or more members OF a com
mon partnership cannot arbitrarily eXpe
fellow-member from the, firm, although
| in law and in fact he may have for
feited all right to membership. They haV
1 no such power. The Laoo can ordain dis
solution, but not portion only of the part
ners. So in this great Union or politica
partnership of States: Massachusetts,, as
State or member of the partnership, has NJ
constitutional power to decide whether o
not South Carolina, as a State,is a right
full member of such Union. An,
such theory as that would produce con
fusion, and conflict, and anarchy in on
whole eonfederated system. Our father
wisely provided for even SO remote con
tiugency. Upon all such questions, the
set over. all the States and all the depart
lments Of the General Government, gran
national judicial tribunal, whose decree
lwere to be the supreme law of the lanC
and whose determinations, when delibeI
ately made, are declared to be final an
1irreversible. If the present Radical Con
gress have the right and the Constitutions
power to say that South Carolina shall nc
be represented in the councils of the natioI
as they have even gone so far as to sa
Kentucky shall not be, then they have prt
1cisely the same right and power to say this
the sovereign State of Ohio shall not
represented, whether in or out of re
1belliori 1t she shall go Democratic thi
fall, shall not be at all surprised if th
proposition is made toexpel her, upon til
ground of her distoyahy. The whole thin
will depend upon Massachusetts. Cor
gress assumes to- act, not up6
the personal qualifications of the il
dividual member. as to his age {
citizenship, or whether he has been legal
returned by majority of the qualife
electors of his district; but upon the que'
tion whether the State, as such, in her cha
.. acter of sister sovereign shall be repreSentt
; at aU There could. in my humble opinion
be no clearer violation of the Constitutio
than this. 1t would be erecting tribunt
within the Constitution. by itsfmere cres
Jure, higher than the Constitution itsel
for it /. owhere appears in that insurumen
by the slightest implication of its term
| that State, as such. can forfeit her rigf
as a member of the Union. The idea that
majority of the States shall have the powt
to eXpel or annihilate another or minor
ty of the States, is a rank and naked polit
cal heresy, and is too absurd to merit al
gument. ~ .gsu.I eltl- - s'-g.1ul
But, my fellow-citizens, outside OF theS
constitutional questions, and simply as
question of policy and humanity, what
the oreat duty of the hour set before ii
American people? Is it mercy or is
vengeance? Answer me, not as Turks,
, Hottentots, not as wild savages or rue
+. barbarians, but as men, as Intelligent cit
. zens, as Evangelical Christians in the min,
teenth century of the Prince of Peace. FL
! one, standing here as a man and as a
American citizen, yielding to none in dew
ton to the best interests of my country,
haveno hesitation inisaying that this dut
will be best performed by admitting thel
Southern people at once and uncOnditiol
= ally, except the imposition of the Const
. tutional oath of allegiance, into this gre
family of independent commonwealth
i But say our political opponents, an
q l give them the benefit of their positio
: these men are secessionists and ira
t tors, and should be punished
D such by erctuding them from all Il
S privileges aud benefits of the Cover
= ment which they sought to overthrow
;. The plain and simple answer to this obje
r tion is, that if they are traitors in a tecl
e nical and legal sense, after we acknow
It edged them as belligerent power und
q the law of nations, their treason and
h consequences are clearly defined in wri
ten Constitution, and the laws of the coul
d try amply furnish the means and the ma
e ner of their punishment. But repeat, tn
!, punishment can only be meted out to ind
! viduals, and not to States.