The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1868-09-03

In it attempt to prove that Mr..
LINCoLN's plan of reconstruction was
identical with that afterwards pursued
by President JOHNSON, the Courier
has the following paragraph:
This plan was re affirmed by Mr..
Lino0ln inaAlsrch 80, nOrsdid he ever
waver in his purpose TO give 1t valid,
ity and effect. Mr.. Lincoln" said
Senator Doolittle in his Valparaiso
speech, recognized the States OF the
Soutl as States in this Union their
laws and their constitutions as they
existed before the act of secession, re-
ceiyirg distinet.a and emphatic recog-
nihOH.
in Che same speech from which we
quoted the other day, showing that he
distinctly recognized the power OF
Congress over the question of recon
struction, Mr.. LINCOLN used the fol-
lowing words
I'VE all agree that the seeded
States, so called, are ont Of their prac
tica5 relation l0jh the Uat0R; and that
the sole o6jrct of the Government, ciUit
and military az regard to these ,StatfS,
as 10 again get them into that proper
practical relation"
Now. if he raengnized the laws and
constitutions of those States, as they
existed before the act of secession, as
still valid and in force, what did he
mean by saying thAt-those States were
out of their practical relations with
the Union? The constitutions and
laws Of the seeded States recognized
the legality of slavery; hence, if Mr.
LINCOLN recognized, +" distinctly and
alphabetically" those Flaws and con
stitutions as they existed before the
act Of secession" he distinctly and
emphatically recognized the illegally
Of his Proclamation of Emancipation
which abrogated those laws and con.
situations. The. Courier may not see
the absurdity. It's intelligent readers
have no difficulty in deteetingit. {...
1t was the wish of Mr.. LINCOLN and
the Republican party, to reconstruct
the rebellious States on a white basis
u purely a0hite basis. But Mr.
JOHNSON and the Democratic part,
would not have it so. The fourteenth
amendment to the Constitution of tn,
United States was the embodiment 0
this wish. Thatamend ment not onl,
did not give the negroes the right o
voting, but it took away from TIT
whites the right to vote for them. II
was for the latter reason that tn,
Democrats, with Mr.. JOHNSON at theil
head. secured its rejection by tn,
Southern States. They wanted not
only to give white rebels the privilege
of voting themselves, but also to al
low them to represent their negroes
In other words, they desired to bestoy
upon the rebels the increase of polit
ical power growing cut of the emanci
patton Of the slaves. This was so gross
ly unfair, and such fraud upon the
loyal States, that it was not tolerate
by the Republican party. If, sail
the Republicans, the negroes are no
permitted to vote, rebels shall not b
allowed to- vote for them. Upon thii
question, of whether rebels SHOULD
represent their former slaves, the par
ties took issue, and the result was tn,
rejection Of the amendment. Then il
was that Congress said if the rebels o
the South are not willing to reorgan
ize their States on an exclusivel,
white basis, we will see what can b,
done by giving the negroes a chance
and the act enfranchising the blacks
was passed and became a law.
If it Is urged that the rebel State
are not reconstructed on a whit
basis, the Democratic party alone i
responsible. That party wanted then
reconstructed on a white and blael
basis, with. the whites alone to do tn,
voting. The Republicans wanted /
reconstruct chem on a purely whit
basis, the blacks being omitted bot
IN the voting and the representation
But if these States had to be recon
structed7On alyhite and yblack basis
the Republicans affirmed that bot
the whites and blacks should do tn
voting. This the Democrats regar
as a great hardship. Intelligent me
deem it but simple justice.
---
GEN. VANDERYEER, OF Hamilton