Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1868-10-02
logically true respond to the question,

logically true. I respond to the question
ana assert that 1t Is not tue, either iogi-
caiiy or otherwise. 1t will be recoiIected
that tho Chief Justice had, long before his
letter Was written, pronounced iudicialiy
that the State Of North Carolina had been
reconstructed by the act OF the President.
and that such act had been fully confirmed
by thesconcuuent action OF Congress. His
argument must be then that Congress bad
the power t. reconstruct the State O second
time. Is that the line OF tie argument p
LII So, should like to know how maDy
tunes Congress has the right IL reconstruct
the State, ant; whether it eau ever be con
sidered as finally reconstructed ? at the
Reconstruction acts OF Congress are void,
so are the Reconstruction measures Of
President Johnson" says Chief Justice
Pearson. Ii the Reconstruction measures
OF President Johnson We're valid, as the
Chlef Justice and L have both udjudicated
then the Reconstruction acts of Congress
are necessarily null and void, say I, and I
prove 1t thus: Ii the Legislature grant a
tract OF land 10 one person, and afterward
grant the same land to another, will not
the latter grant be void because the first
grant is violated And will it not be a
perVersion OF the rules of logic to say, in
such case, that ii the second grant be void,
the first must be so too I? Of such reason
ing nothing less can be said, than that it is
manifestly absurd. The case of a second
State grant is precisely the same in prin-
clpie with a second reorganization of a
State by the President and Congress-
Chief Justice Pearson, III his letter, admits
the authority of the decision in the case of
ec porte Hughes that is, he admits that
North Carolina was, at the time when that
woo hot hal Il oEo1y-
organized and restored to all the rights and
bound to all the duties Of State in the
Union, and being SO [ defy him or any
other man to show any authority in the
Congress Of the United states, or in the
law Of Nations, to thrust her out Of the
Union for the purpose of attempting to
restore her a second time. It is very
certain that the logic Of his letter cannot
do it.
I think then, my fellow-citizens, that I
have successfully performed my task, by
showing that the Reconstruction measures
Of Congress are, in the language of one of
the articles. Of the National Democratic
and Conservative platform, usurpations,
and unconstitutional revolutionary and
void - and it is my firm belief that they
will be decided to be SO by the Supreme
Court Of the United States. Now suppose
such q decision TO be made, will it not be
the duty of all the people Of the United
States to acquiesce in it ? The friends of
Seymour and Blair, undoubtedly, will do
SO; and if the celebrated invocation of
General Grant to s. let US have peace, is
sincere, then his friends must acquiesce
likewise. Away, then, with the fear of the
war spoken of by the Chief Justice
[ call upon you, then. my fellow-citizens,
you, above whose heads floats the flag of
the United States, with the glorious names
Of Seymour and Blair inscribed upon it, to
vote as you may think right, to fear God,
and to fear nothing else.