Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1867-05-10

races and colors, vesting unlimited power
in n military satrap, substituting the CHM
mering sword and the glitterlng bayone
for the judicial tribunals. 1t lays the axe
to the root of the elective franchise 1t ex
tends the right of suffrage to three or toul
millions of people excluded by the Htate
constitutions, and excludes tens OF thou
sands by classification who are entitled tc
II under the State constitutions-the
broadest bill of attainder or of pains anC
penalties ever enacted. 1t took away Other
rights reserved to the States as States
The Constitution provided that no man
should be tried except in the State where
his offence was committed it prohibited
Congress from passing e.r post .tdcto laws,
or laws impairing the right of trial by jury,
or from taking away life, liberty, OF
property without due process of law
These were all State rights, exercised by
the people of the several States within their
boundaries but they were all swept away.
He had travelled through Egypt, Syria,
Turkey in Asia, Turkey in Europe, and
thousands of miles through Russia, and
there was no such despotism in Africa, or
Asia, or Turkey, or Russia as that which
was established by these acts. They all
had courts of some description, and allowed
hearing and an opportunity for defence ;
the sword was not the only arblter but
here an act of Congress swept ten States
out of existence, reduced them to worse
than territorial bondage, and subjected
every one of their ten millions of people,
of all ages, sexes and colors, to the despOtic
will of q military commander. History was
full of examples not only of physical cpl
denies, but of moral epidemics, when, for
short periods of time, vast bodies OF peO-
pie were infected, as if with madness, to
perform deeds from which, on the sober,
second thought, they would shrink back
with horror and dismay. We were now
suffering from one of these epidemics.
Although all the sacred rights which lie
at the foundation of public iberty-for
which Sidney persisted and Hampden bled,
and our patriot fathers poured out their
blood profuseIy in the war of the Revolu-
tion-were protected by the Constitution,
were the people to be told that Congress
could take them away, and that this court
was powerlesS to interfere, because they
were political rights Was the only RENE
DIV through the ballot-box? Ehe elabor-
ate arguments in the Federalist and the
great discussions in the various State con-
ventions show that our fathers well knew
that the people were subject to epidemic
movements, arising out of great
in which they might do acts that in cooler
moments they would deeply regret and
guarantees to guard against such emergen
cy as the present, when the popular mind
is dashed into a tempest, and the waves of
the great ocean of civilStrife are still throw
ing their tumultuOusS urgeS upon our shores.
If the people are to decide such questions,
where are we to look for the will of the
people Congress are but the servants
and agents of the people. The Constitu
ton was the unanimous voice of the people
of all the States, and that was the will
which should govern. One of the objects
of the constitution was to protect minori
ties minOrities of States and minorities of
the people. The majority could protect
themselves; the power of legislation was in
their hands.
But it had been said that these States had
faded out of existence. The act of Con
gress, although it calls them '.rebel States,
treats them as though they were not States
of the Union. 1t requires them to insert
CERTAIN clauses in their State constitutions
granting and guaranteeing the right of suf-
frage to portion Of their inhabitants, and
it commands them TO give their assent to
certain amendments of the Constitution of
the United States. Can Congress frame a
constitution for a State? Can Congress
insert any provision in State constitution?
Has Congress a right to dictate to the
people of State who shall be entitled to
the right OF suffrage under their cOnstitu
ton ? Although in some respects the act
legislates for these States as if they were
not States, ity etadmits them to be States, be-
cause it forbids the admission of their rep
resentatives until the last constitutional
amendment is ratified by constitutional
majority. If they were not States, there
were but tWenty-SiX States when the act
was passed, and more than three fourths of
those twenty-siX States had ratified the
constitutional amendment; and yet Con
gress admitted that the amendment had not
been ratified by the constitutional number
of States requisite for that purpose, and re-
qulred these States to ratify it before their
readmissiOn into the Union, and excluded
them until it should have received the rati-
fication of n sufficient number of States to
give it efficacy.
But it was said that there had been q |
great rebellion in these States, bywhich the |
regular operation of the laws and the regu-
lar State Authorities had been suspended. |
True but what then ? If the ordinances |
OF secession and the constitutions framed |
during the rebellion were mere nullities, |
they still remained States of the Union.-l
Then what was the consequence when the |
insurgent power was removed If Brit
lsh army had seized and held Louisiana for
years, suspended all the operations of the
courts and public functionaries so that
there was no one to reinaugurate State
government there, would Louisiana there
by cease to be State; or could the people,
on the removal of the hostile force, come
together and again put the State in opera
ton What was the difference between
the same results produced by foreign inva-
slon or domestic instruction The III
surrection prevailed for a while. 1t had
no lawful, no constitutional power. The
secession ordinances were mere utilities. The
pretended State functionaries during that
time were no functionaries at all, because
they had not taken the requisite oath to |
support the Federal Constitution, and were
engaged III reasonable rebellion. When
the opposing obstacle was removed and
the insurrection WIS suppressed, did chaos
prevail? Was there no State left ? Were
there no people of a State that could recog-
nize government ? A case decided in ID |
Galhson as to the island of Castine, putting
IN force the doctrine of post hnoine, was
precisely IN point. During the war of 1872
Castine was held for years by the British,
and not vestige of State or Federal an |