The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1867-01-16

themselves, but they cherished no real affec-
ton for it, just as President SWANS present
friends submit to the Union, but cherish no
real affection for it. They were ready at any
moment. and especially ready after the 4th
of March, 1854, when the great peace move
ment in this State was commenced, to cut
themselves loose from the cotton States and
return to their allegiance to the United
States Whatever President SWANS private
opinions may have been, he co-operated with
Governors Vance and Graham in resisting
this movement up to the last moment, when,
with the latter, he proceeded on that fruit
less, not to say absurd and ridiculous mis-
sion ts Gen. Sherman, twelve miles below.
Raleigh.
We do not perceive the propriety with
which President Swain compares Mr.. Biggs'
test-oath with the test-oath in Mr.. Stevens
bill. The former was the emanation of law
lessness and violence. It was conceived in
the worst passions of bloody and dis
astrous rebellion. Its authority was, at best,
doubtful. 1t was to have authority and
responsibility if the rebellion succeeded, but
it was to perish as infamous if the rebellion
failed. But the oath in Mr. Stevens bill
comes to us from rightful authority. 1t is the
emanation of benignant and merciful gov
eminent. It is not stamped with either
violence, lawlessness, or usurpation. The
hands that present it have never been lifted
against the temple of the Union. 1t is a
part of the bargain We promised to keep
when we submitted Internationally to the
national arps, in April, 1865. Fit be harsh
so far as some of our citizens are concerned,
it can not be said that those of us who APP
prove it are answerable for this harshness-
1t is simply necessity, if we would restore
the Union. The Presidents plan," as it is
called, imposed an exceedingly mild oath.
That plan was defeated in this State by
President SWANS present political friends.
IfPresident Swain, Gov Graham, and others,
had shown any zeal for the Presidents plan
as it was originally announced, and if they
had labored for it as they have against test
oaths, and as they have for such settlement
of our troubles as would be agreeable to
themselves, that plan would have succeeded,
and the State would doubtless have now
been IN the Union. This plan having failed,
mainly as the result of the action of Presi-
dent SWANS present friends, the Howard
amendment was presented. This amend
ment proposes only to secure, in the funda-
mental law, the great objects for which the
war was prosecuted against the rebellious
States There is not a principle in this
amendment which was not universally con-
coded by the people of the South at the close
of the war; But as the Presidents plan was
at first embarrassed and at last destroyed by
the love of Office on the part of President
SWANS friends, so the same selfish DISPOSE
ton obtrudes itself as a hindrance when the
amendment is proposed. The main objec-
ton to the amendment is that it will exclude
certain persons from Office Let no one say
that this statement in regard to President
SWANS friends is unfounded, for in his first
letter to Gov. Perry, in which he discusses
this amendment, he quotes and most emphat-
icaIly endorses an expression attributed to
Mr.. Adams, that the disqualification to hold
office" is "puni&hment aoorse than death. >
Here, then, is the key to this opposition to
the amendment. We have it from President
Swain himself The Howard amendment
disqualifes certain public men for Office,
and this is a punishment worse than death. u
They would rather die than to give up the
Offices We thank President Swain for his
frankness He has "spoken out in meeting u
He has told the whole truth. It is well
enough to restore the Union, say these gen
tlemen, but if it be necessary that we should
renounce office in order to restore it, it shall
not be done. Hence their opposition to the
Presidents plan, to the Howard amendment
and to Mr.. Stevens bill. They will restore
the Union on no conditions that do not pro-
vide for them as the ofice-holders of the
country; and as the Union must be restored
it is indispensable that some bill like that Of
Mr. Stevens should be passed, by which
these former office-holders shall be excluded
not only from Office but from the ballot-box
The country must not suffer longer on theil
account. Even if they had not incurred
public odium, and forfeited all claims tt
political consideration by the use they have
made of Office and power to ruin their coun
try, they would have no special claims OF
our people. The Unionists of the State hav'
as able men in their ranks-men who hav,
the confidence of the government and of tn,
Northern people, and who would be infn
itely more useful than any of Presiden
SWANS political friends could be in tn
work of reconstruction.
We regard the oath in Mr.. Stevens bill a
| Just and proper. After what has occurred
no man ought to be allowed to take part il
establishing new government for the Stat
who can not take this oath. 1t prescribe
no secessionist, whether original or otherwise
who saw his error and repented, and desired
| the success of the Union cause after the 4tl
of March, 1864. 1t proscribes no Unions
who remained faithful in his attachment t.
his principles. 1t proscribes no poor con
: script who was dragged off to fight agains
/ his will. But it does prescribe "consciou
| traitors" It does exclude from the ballo,
| box those who staked all on the Confederacy