Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1867-12-11
CT FIREMAN.
MONTPELIER, VI:
WEDNESDAY, DEC. IL, 1867.



the reconstruction laws of Congress, which
Mr.. johnson declares to be unconstitutional
and the tone of arrogance and defiance which
pervades this portion of the message fully
warrants the comment of the London Times,
"a critic that has stood by Mr.. johnson as
long as johnson had the least show of reason
on his side) which says;
1.-THE message shows that Mr. johnson
90 has learned nothing. He transcends him
50 self in impudence. He regards his Office
% as absolute sovereigns do their preroga-
q tives. He forfeits all respect"
1t is, probably, unnecessary to show the
fallacies and contradictions of the message
If Mr.. johnson supposed his readers had no
memories and no logical faculties, he may
have thought his unfounded assertions, his
false statements, and his inconsequent rea-
soning, would be convincing; but it is, in
fact, an insult to the intelligence of the
country to address to it logic thai ais to
comprehend, or even to consider, the .,r-ible
war that has recently spent X fury u the
whole country. The problem of reconstruct
ton was not an easy one for President or
Congress but he would have been worse
than fool who should have attempted to
solve it without respect to the experiences of
the war. The first builders of any structure
may be excused if they trust chiefly to the
light of reason but he who attempts to re-
pair shattered edifce, is guilty of the
supremest laundering if he refuses to be
taught by the experience of the disaster
has Tod ba huI
Yet President johnson, and his followers,
and the Democratic press of the country,
consider the question of reconstruction
though there had been no storm, no wreck,
no disaster, no destruction, no lessons to be
learned, no provision to be made against
recurrence of the calamity, no punishment
of any sort to be inflicted upon the meters
and supporters of the terrible rebellion which
has devastated the whole country; though
nothing in fact was to be done. except to
pour oil on the troubled waters, wave olive
branches, kill fatted calves, and make every
thing lovely as speedily as possible by well
coming the blood-stained traitors to their old
power in the nation, while giving them their
old supremacy in the states. In short,
President Johnson's policy, as he now devel-
ops it, makes treason only pretty game in
which, if the traitors win they win every
thing, and if they lose they lose nothing.
We quite agree with the message where it
says, g When civil war has been brought
90 to close it is manilestly the first interest
:. and duty of the state to repair the injuries
(which the war has inflicted, and to secure
'sthe benefit of the lessons IL teaches, as fully
land speedily as possible" What lessons
were taught by the war? Who were loyal
to the government in the rebellious states
during its continuance? Did not the white
men Of that region almost unanimously fol-
low the rebel flag? Did not the black men
of that locality almost unanimously welcome
with JOY the flag of the nation? What - les
son - does this fact teach if not the duty, in
any scheme for repairing the desolations Of
war. to give the loyal men at least the same
chance in the government the disloyal?
Is not this Justice Is it not wisdom
IL it not righteousness And would any ma
tional government deserve to live which
should in such crisis, abandon the friends
whose right arms and loyal hearts saved the
country, for the sake of quleting the unj just
clamors of the bitter enemies whose right
arms and disloyal hearts brought the nation
to the brink of ruin? Would not such black
ingratitude, such base treachery, such mean
unrighteousness, damn a nation in the eyes of
the world, and bring down upon it the fear
full judgments of a just God?
But what strength is there in this presi-
Dental reasoning? Putting aside for mo-
ment the essential and wicked injustice of
the JOhnsOnian reconstruction, let us inquire
whether it has any strength pure logic
1t is true enough that the constitution is the
supreme law of the land. law which the
President and Congress and people must
equally obey. But the constitution il no
more the supreme law now than it rom
the firing of the first gun at Fort Su to
the surrender of the last rebel army Gen.
Grant. Neither constitution nor laws are
silent in the midst of arms. According to
the theory of our government, their force is
not for a moment suspended, but they are
entitled to the same reverence and respect in
times of rebellion in times of peace. But
will Mr.. johnson pretend that the rebel state
government of South Carolina during the re-
bellion was entitled to the same respect as
the state government of Vermont? Was it
government which the federal authorities
were bound in any way to treat as a govern
ment? Had it any rights under the consti-
tuition of the United States? But it is
undeniable that the rebel state government
of South Carolina represented, and fairly
represented, nine-tenths of the white voters
of that state during the whole period of its
existence Yet President johnson and his
cabinet were fully agreed, in May 1865, that
the rebel state governments were illegal and
unconstitutional ; and, so far, they were then,
and are now fully supported by the opinion
of the great majority of all parties in the
country. 1t may then be assumed as the
basis of argument, that, in May 1865, the
Southern States,-with the exception of
Louisiana, Tennessee, and perhaps Arkansas,
had no state organizations which entitled
them to representation in Congress, or to the
management of civil affairs in their own
boundaries. They were, in fact, completely
disorgaD lied, and, so far as any civil govern
ment was concerned, had no standing what
ever in the Union.
How shall a disorganized state be reorgan-
lied? Does the constitution prescribe any
method? These very important ques-
tons in the progress of the argument, and
questions which are conveniently ignored in
the message