The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-10-01
TUESDAY, OCTOBER l, 1867.
The Two Plans Contrasted.

nOlltlOal DrODI6Iu Ol Jul bAhAOo1 NAAN sNS 1NNS
tion with every good citizen should be, how
to secure loyal civil governments in the late
Rebel States. We showed yesterday that the
Democratic or Johnsonian plan would inevita-
bly, result in establishing a Rebel ohgarchy in
each of the late Rebel States, which would
dominate most unjustly over the loyal ma
iority deprived of power through the disfran-
Chisement Of the most Of its members), and
which would be hostile and dangerous to the
peace and stability of the Union itself. Mr..
Johnson and the Democrats propose to dis
franchise the great majority of the loyal citi-
zens Of the South. This would, of course,
make the Rebels supreme in each of the late
Rebel States, and would give them the balance
of power in the general Government. Such a
result of the war would be as disastrous as
would have been the triumph of the Rebel
armies under Lee, and in its ulterior effects it
might be even worse.
The only safe plan of reconstruction is to
neutralize the Rebel element by the loyal
element This can only be done by giving
every loyal man the ballot. It would be the
height Of absurdity to disfranchise loyal men
and let Rebels vote. If any disfranchising is
to be done, it should apply to those who have
sought to overthrow the Government, not to
those who have defended it.
Now it so happens that the loyal element
of the South is composed largely Of colored
citizens. If any loyal Northern man is
squeamish about negro suffrage in the Rebel
States, then our reply to him is that we must
work with the materials we have. We are
shut up to one of three courses of action-
First, to a continued occupation of the
Rebel States by the military power
Of the general Government; secondly, to the
establishment of Rebel oligarchy by the dis
reimbursement of the majority of the loyal
element; thirdly, to a safe and loyal recon-
struotion through the enfranchisement Of the
colored citizens OF the Rebel States. These are
the only alternatives before us. Military Occu-
patton, as a permanent policy, is not to be
thought of. 1t is inconsistent with our form
of government, and would be dangerous to our
free institutions. The establishment of Rebel
Oligarchy is equally inadmissible. 1t would
be impolitic and dangerous to the last degree.
We are left, therefore, as our only resource, to
loyal reconstruction through the enfranchise-
ment of all loyal citizens. There is no other
road out of our difficulties.
So far as the disfranchisement of Rebels is
concerned, it is question of pure policy. No
man who has lifted his hand against the Gov
ernment has any right to demand the enjoy
ment of political power under it. By the
strict rules of justice he has forfeited, by his
treason, not only his political rights, but his
civil rights, and his life also. The Govern
ment, however, is to be guided by wise dis
cretion, and from motives of sound policy
should exclude from political power only
those would be especially dangerous to a safe
and loyal reconstruction. This is what Con
gress has arrived at in its policy. The Recon
struction acts disfranchise only those who il
going into the Rebellion broke solemn oath
which they had previously taken to supper
and defend the Constitution of the United
States. The great masses of the people
are left untouched. The policy has been oAt
of enfranchisement rather than disfranchise
ment. The loyal element, left unfettered, it il
believed will be able to hold its own and Il
bring back the revolted States pledged to un
swerving fealty to the Union. According Il
the precedent of the Johnsonian policy, W,
should have been perfectly justified in ex
oluding the great mass of the Rebels, for W,
certainly have as good right to exclud
Rebels as he had to exclude loyal men
but Congress was wiser and more hu
name, and extended kindness and good
win to all except the leading and pro
minent Rebels. The broad dividing lin,
between the Democratic policy and the Re
publican policy is, that the former woult
create a Rebel olgarchy in the Rebel States, By
disfranchising the majority of the loyal citi
zens, while the latter, by impartial suffrage
coupled with the disfranchisement of tn
Rebel leaders, would lay broad and deel
the foundations of loyal and lasting recon
struction. 1t is true, this includes the idea o
full citizenship for the colored man in all tn,
Rebel States; but in that measure lies tn,
nations only reasonable hope of future peac
and safety. Sound policy here comedies will
the highest dictates of justice. If Rebels vote
loyal men must vote also. That is the Who'll,
sum and substance of the argument.
AS General Sickles truthfully and eloquent,
remarked in his great speech few night
since had this measure prevailed ten year
ago we should have had no rebellion Adop
IL now. and we shall never have another rebel
lion. Garry out the Johnsonian-D Democrati
policy Of creating Rebel oligarchy to swa