The weekly loyal Georgian., 1867-08-10

| promptly, more absolutely, more sub
missively. or with one tenth of the
sacrifice of property, and hope, and
pride, and feeling, comply with all the
terms demanded on their part, than did
the Southern States and people. They
laid down their arms; they gave up the
great principles Of government which
their fathers taught them never to yield !;
and to maintain which they fought so
long and endured so much; though
already impoverished, they gave up four
billions more of property-the descended
patrimony of centuries" etc.
Now, if Mr.. Hills statement is true
that the people of the South, in the
surrender, consented to so much sacri-
flee Of hope, and pride, and feeling, and
after they were impoverished, gave up
four billions more Of property and in
addition to all this, laid down their
arms and gaze up the great principles
Of government which their fathers
taught them neoer to yield, what did
they have left that they could hold
independently Of the will of the con-
queror ? | had always understood the
Constitution to be the embodiment of
the great principles of government"
transmitted to us by our fathers Alter
we gdue up these great principles of
| government, which our ''fathers taught
us never to yield" what constitutional
rights did we have left =? What equali'
| ty in the Union did we retain when VIC
surrendered the great principles OF
government What right to regulate
suffrage contrary TO the will of the
| conqucror, does a Stale retain when
she has surrendered these great princi
pies?
Why has not the conqucror, to whom
these great principles have been sur,
rendered, us much right to regulate
suffrage and dis.ranchise persons who
have incurred his displeasure, as he has
to dictate the destruction of "four billions
more of their property after he has
already impoverished" them? Thus
impoverished and perfectly powerless,
Mr.. Hill advises us still to resist, fight
for our rights, and stand by the Consti-
tuition. What part of the Constitution
is left for US TO stand by, after we have
surrendered the great principles of gov
ernment embodied in the Constitution
What rights have we left to .fyM for
that were not protected by those great
principles, and which were not lost by
their surrender? How can we claim
equality with the conqueror after we
have surrendered both our property and
the great principles Of government at
his dictation
Mr.. Hill denies the power OF the
Federal Government to destroy the
government of State, or even TO regu-
late the suffrage in Il State, and urges
TO stand by our present State Govern
ment; and at the same time tells us
that we are, and Gt,cdys nere, i'll the
Union. This involves strange alb
surdity. If the Federal Government
has no right to destroy the government
of State, or to regulate suffrage in Il
State in the Union, and if we always
were in the Union, it necessarily follows
that the present State Government is
Illegal, because it was formed at the
dctation of the President, upon the
ruins Of the old government of the
State, which he had set aside by the
arrest and Imprisonment Of its Execu-
tive, by the refusal to allow its Legisla-
ture to meet, and by its disbandment by
military force. If, then, Mr.. Hill be
right, the government of the State, as it
existed prior to the surrender, is its
only legal government and. the Cop,
sttution, as it then existed, IS its only
rightfuI Constitution and both the
present State Constitution and the pres
cnt State Government are founded i'll
usurpation, and are necessarily illegal
and void.
The admission that the President had
right to establish the present State
Government, is an admission that the
conqueror had right, after our surren-
der, 10 set aside our then existing gov
! ernment and dictate to us another
government in its place.
If the Constitution did not protect
cur right to retain our State govern
mcnt as it existed prior to the surren
! der, what other right did it protect? II
the conqueror had the right to give US q
new Constitution and new State
( government, abolishing our old one
why did he not have the right to regu
7 | late suffrage in the new? And if he
4: had the right to arrest and imprlson
I and depose the officers OF the thel
I State government, why has he not TIM
e right to disfranchise them? Is it any
: more violation Of the Constitution Il
r declare that the Governor of State, o
5 a Judge of her Supreme Court, shal
: not hold office in future, than it is u
= arrest, imprison and depose him whel
y found in office? Mr.. Hill adults tn
+ right TO do the latter when he defends
the plcsent State government, whicl
= was founded in the exercise by th
p couuueror (the President acting u
!, such) of his right to destroy the old
Aud when he has made this admission
he ha3 no escape from the position tina
conqueror, possessing the right to Sc
s aside the State government which b.
," finds in existence, and set up a ne'
= government in its stead, has right
,, regulate suffrage in the new govern
- = ment set up by him.
U This being the right of the conquerol
e as admitted by Mr.. Hill himself, tn
" only remaining question is, what depar
e. ment of the cOnqueror's governmel
l. has the right to exercise this power
70 Admit that the government OF th
conqxeror has this power over us, an
lie YOU admit that we have no constitutions
c, rights except such as the conquert
I'd chooses to allow. Then it matters vel
10 little which department of the govern
TO mcnt exercises the power over us. III
OF President undertook to exercise it, an
ID destroyed our old government, and s.
t. aside our old Constitution, and dictate
III the terms upon which we were to Tor
ys new ones.
ne After this, Congress, which is the W;
ne making power, denied the power OF II
G. President to make peace with u
e. REGULATE the terms of the peace, al
be form governments for us, without Il
he consent of Congress, which must MAJ
n all necessary appropriations, and pa
h, all necessary laws for the restoration
a. the States, and without even consulti'
IL the Senate, which is part OF the treat
is making power.