The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1867-02-14
The Debate on Stevens. BIZ.

OehoNo 'h'C bbuhS, DiymOuu ana
other radicals had, on Friday last,
opposed governing the Southern
States by military rule. The full re-
ports Of the debate show that no
such opposition was made. The
speech of Raymond is pronounced a
miserable failure. He said:
''He knew of no obstacle to the
establishment Of civil authority in
the Southern States on such a basis
as Congress deemed wise and just.
That civil authority would be emit
tied, in case of resistance to it, to the
aid of the army to execute its de-
crees.
This would be no better than una
dulterated military rule Again:
Gle should prefer that Congress
would appoint civil commissioners
for each State-naming them in the
bill, if it was not willing to trust
their selection to the President and
let those commissioners organize n
Government of some sort, and let
the military support their decrces
Surely Stevens is as good a friend
to civil liberty as Raymond.
Mr. Banks explained away his APP
parent willingness to do Justice to
the South.
MR. BANKS. the remarks which
/ made, MIR. Speaker, 7 had no allu-
sion to my negotiations with the
President. The gentleman from
Pennsylvania Mr.. Stevens knows
more Of his opinions than do, and
will yield to his policy much sooner
than L shall. Expressions of en-
couragemcnt to Mr.. Banks, and Of
satisfaction with the last remark /
spoke in good faith to the House,
asking for time to debate this CUES
ton. My reason for it is based on
the simple idea, which every member
can understand, that the measures
which we propose, and one of which
is now before the House, depend for
their efficacy on being enacted by
two-thiIds of the two Houses against
the Executive branch of the Govern
mcnt. My belief is that we cannot
carry on the Government of the
United States in that way-that we
must have laws in which the Execu-
tive Will cooperate, IN order to make
those laws effective. IT, after we, the
representatives OF the people, have
agreed as to what laws are necessary
to secure the peace of the country
and to maintain the existence of the
Government, and after the people
have sustained us in those laws, the
President refuses cooperation, it is
our duty to the country to drop the
question Of reconstruction, and to
proceed to the consideration of the
position and purposes of the Presi-
dent himself. [ repeat my express
sion of belief that we can, before
this session closes, come to such con-
clusion rs will compel the President
of the United States to sustain us in
our action, or as will justify us in
adopting another course, if he re-
fuses. l have no negotiations with
the President, nor do / know his
opinion; and in the vote which I
shall give on this question, neither
the gentleman from PENNSYLVANIA
nor any other man has right to
assume that [ accept the Presidents
policy in the slightest degree. [
hope for change of his position;
and think it is not impossible, and
is worth trying for.
Since the above was selected, We
have received the New York Times,
of Saturday, which, speaking of the
bill, says:
"The fatal objection to the bill is.
however, that, while protesting to
establish military rule in the South
ern States, it is intended to commit
Congress to Mr.. Stevens Territorial
theory, with all its consequences. 1t
is, avowedly, framedas for conquered
territory and a conquered people,
having no organized Government,
and no rights which the conqueror is
bound to respect. The affirmation of
this theory is not essential to the JUS
tification or the efficacy of the mea-
sure. For all practical purposes, the
amended preamble proposed by Mr..
Bingham would be as potent as the
terrltorializing propositions with
which Mr.. Stevens prefaces his mea-
sure. Theory is irrelevant in o case
OF this nature, and in this case it OBJ
structs the progress of otherwise use
full provisions, and raises discussion
on points which should be intro
duced as substantive propositions,
not aS mere side Issues Tho +inoa +o