American citizen. [volume] (Butler, Butler County, Pa.) 1863-1872, 1867-10-09
CONGRESS AND THE OONSTI-
g s, lion. ai7.

ar
The attempt to represent Congress as
acting outside of the Constitution it its
reconstruction laws, and as having set
aside the great charter of our liberties for
the purpose of usurp:ng aud yielding
despotlc authority never contemplated
by the founder of the government, began
with President Jenson, aud has been
followed up iudustriously by all the cop
perheads and rebels VIII, constitute the
army OF his supporters, by the few weak
minded or corrupt recreant Republicans
and camp followerswho left the great
loyal organization for the sake of the
loaves aud fishes of official patronage,
aud BY such extreme Radicals as wish
TO drive the party into ultra measures at
which the majority revolt. But, by
whpmsoever, urged, this charge is wicked
and most deleterious to all the best in.
terests Of the Republic. No political
organization our history has ever escaped
charges of this kind, so that it can hard
ly be matter Of wonder in the present
case. But againstthe reconstruction acts
or Congress the allegations have been
most violently urged, because the Presi-
dent has desired that excuse for no en-
forcing them sH
General Sickles has briefly replied to
these charges by referring to the decis>
ion of the Supreme Court in the New
Mexico case, In which it was distinctly
affirmed that the military occupation Of
the territory Of an enemy supersedes all
civil government existing there, and
furthermore, that the orders, ordinances
ana regulations made by the military
commander remained in force until su>
perseded by Congress, or by local civil
government created by Congress. 1t
cannot reasonably be disputed that the
conquered territory occupied by our
armies at the close of the war was and
had been that held by an enemy for four
years for, although constituting portion
of our national domain, it was beyond
our control entirely during all that period
in consequence of being forcibly seized
and held by rebellion of the inhabit-
auts thereof.
That the body of the rebels constituted
an 'enemy'in the eye of the law is clear.
That this was the ''enemy's territory"
contemplated by the decision in question
is not less clear They bad lived there
all their lives, they had ruled it civilly
during all that time, aud though belong
ing to the national empire, it was their
territory also. Until the rebellion was
crushed that condition of things remain.
ed. We had not lost our territory. 1t
was forcibly held by the other portion of
the national partnership, and when the
suit at arms was decided in our favor,
the foreble detainer was ended, and the
property passed into the absolute control
of the common sovereignty for the pur-
poses OF the final adjustment This is
as much good sound law as it is common
sense. We had not lost any portion of
our sovereign rights over this territory
because it happened to have passed out
of our possession into that of an enemy in
arms against us. Our rights were only
tn obeyance, and awaiting the arbitrs-
ment Of war, l e5
But il Is contendei that, admitting
this, the CONQUEST decided nothing more
than the permanent sovereignty and
that under the Constitution the rights of
the subjdgated States then became valid
again on their submission to the laws
The decision in the New Mexico case
does not admit of this construction for
if it did, we could not continue the mil
itary occupation for the purpose of set
curing the fruits of our conquest or pro-
tecting loyal citizens against outrage, and
had that been the case, the rebel armies
might all have been Immediately reorgan- :
ized, and, taking their stand by tleir
State governments, have contenSed them
selves with protecting their rebel author
tiles in nullifying our laws. So eminent
was this danger that it led to the adop-
ton of President Johnson's reconstruct
ton measures, whereby the rebel State
governments were swept aside and new
ones substituted. n
As it would have been impossible to
govern these States by the military au-
thority alone without the aid of civil or
ganization, these measures of the Presi-
dent were useful as transition stages in
the work of reconstruction, and an swer-
ed we'll as far as they went. They had
no other authority than what was deriv-
ed from the decision of the Supreme
Court in the New Mexico case. But the
subsequent recreant course of the Presi-
dent revived the rebel spirit, and renders
it impossible for Congress to be content
with SO imperfect result of 80 great a
struggle. 1t vas then perfectly compe-
tent for Congress, in the exercise of the
power to be vested in it by the language
Of the New Mexico decision, to restore
the military occupation, which was done
in mild form; to subject the new State
governments to it, and provide new ma
chinery of reconstruction, under require>
ments specifically set down, and not in
any sense unconstitutional, because the
power of Congress in this conquered ter
ritory had become as supreme and abso~
lutte as in any of the other unorganized
national territories.
I This was, indeed, in point of fact, the
condition into which the conquered
States had upset by the protracted civil
war. All the civil organization being
involved in the crime or rebellion, had
ceased to have legal existence in the
ovas of tha pational Iawa pras;dant