The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1868-02-20

1865. presume North Carolina had then
passed her constitutional amendments,
an d perhaps some OF the other states =
THE conditions which have been imposep
upon thsse states by the president are not
only reasonable and legitimate but are dicta-
ted by justice and wise foresight for the flu
ture of the republic; and although they may
not be accepted this year, or even the next,
yet that they will ultimately be have no
doubt"
On this particular point will read again
from Che testimony of General Grant In
his examination before the committee of i'm
peachment in July last he was asked by Mr..
Woodbridge, member of the committee
"Qaestion. want to know whether the
plan adopted by Mr.. Johnson was substan-
TALLY the plan which had been inaugurated
by Mr. Lincoln as the basis of his future ac-
tom"
Answer Yes, sir; substantially. I do
not know but that 1t was verbatim the same.
Question 1 suppose the very paper of
Mr.. Lincoln was the one acted on!
ANSWER. should think so. 1 think that
the very paper which / heard rea d twice
while Hr. Lincoln was president was the one
which was carried right through"
And yet you bring your accusations against
Mr. Johnson because he received from Mr..
Lincoln, as a part of his political inherit.
ance, the North Carolina proclamation, in
his own hand writing perhaps, at least the
proclamation which president Lincoln had
twice presented to the cabinet, the very same
paper.
Now, sir, under this proclamation and the
other proclamations of similar import new
constitutions were net adopted by the south
ern states. They TODD upon the idea which
you stood upon in admitting Tennessee, that
the constitutions which held these states to
the union came through the war and were
valid, existing law at the close of the war
and so in all of the states of the south, they
simply amended their constitutions. These
amendments in the case Of North Carolina
were submitted to the people. My colleague
said that none had been submitted. In the
state of North Carolina the import ant
amendments, the one abolishing slavery and
some others, were submitted to the people.
But, sir, am not going to discuss that
question. 1t has been too long the establish
ell law and custom of this country that con-
stitutional convention may adopt constitu-
ton without submission to being now qucs-
toned As was stated by the senator from
Pennsylvania yesterday, that great common
wealth is now an organized state under o
constitution that never was submitted to the
people, and became the supreme law ofthat
state by the will of the cow ention. This is
the law, though think the practice better
to submit amendments to the people.
Now, Mr.. President, what were the amend
ments to the state constitutions in the souths
First, they abolished slavery. Do senators
objectt to thst? Second. secession was in ex-
press terms, repudiate d, and the right to Sc
cede denounced. Third, the rebel debt was
repudiAted, and it was declared that it should
never be paid. These were Ithe material
amendments. Do you, senators, say that the
amendments destroyed the republican char
scter Of those constitutions! Were they not
republican in character before the war!
Were not the constitutions of North Carroll
M, ofSouth Carolina, and Of Georgia at the
time they helped to form the federal union
republican in form? And were not the con-
situations under which Mississippi, Louis
iana, Alabama, Florida, Arkansas, and Tex
as were admitted into this union republican
IN forms That is settled 1 will not discuss
It.
Then, sir, these constitutions that were re-
publican in form before the war came down
through the war, and by the people were
amended, simply adding that slavery should
no longer exist that secession was not the
tue doctrine of state relation to the federal
government; and that the rebel debt should
never be paid. want to know ifthese pro-
visions of amendment destroyed the republi-
can form and character of the constitutions of
the southern states?
Such, Mr. president was the condition of
this business when my colleague, in. the
speech from which have read, said that the
prospect of reconstruction appeared highly
encouraging and he added in that speech:
~ am very glad to see that many of the
southern states are making commendable
progress in the matter of the abolition of
slavery"
If these states had not legal state govern
ments in 1865, want TO know how it is they
could abolish slavery want to know how
they could assent TO an amendment of the
federal union abolishing slavery all over the
United States? If they were then and are
invalid, Illegal governments, how could they
do the most solemn act to which state, can
sssents My colleague, then, not having
been educated by the progress of events, de-
clared, to use his own lanauage-
Il am very glad to see that many of the
southern states are making commendable
progress in the matter of the abolition oil
slavery"
My colleague now denies the authority oil
those conventions to amend the constitutions
OF their states while at the time, when they
were in session, he recognized their proceed
ings.
/ should like to know uponthis question o.