The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-10-07

governments or rights held under the au-
thority OF the local constitutions. Colored
suffrage will continue an established fact. The
real obstacles to the destruction of the new
order Of things will remain as formidable as at
this moment.
Yet another suggestion associates the cleo
tion of Seymour with some mysterious asser-
tion Of power by the Supreme Court. with
Seymour as President, the Albany Argus con-
tends, Chief Justice Chase will 'at one breath
clear away the cloud that has rested over the
Executive, the Congress, and the States"
How the miracle is to be wrought, the Argus
does not explsin. The opinion of the Supreme
Court as to the oonstitutionality of the Recon
struction acts is matter only OF conjecture.
This, however, is known: That in the judgment
of the Chief Justice the Fourteenth amend
ment is a part of the Constitution, and there
fore binding upon the States, whatever fate
befall the Reconstruction acts. Besides, the
new Governments, being recognized by Con-
gress, will not be touched by the Su ureme
Court In any event, nor will any opinion in
regard to the constitutionalty of any particu-
lar link in the chain of reconstruction induce
surrender by the enfranchised freedmen
Of the power they now WELD.
Evidently, then, these more moderate ex-
plantations of the Democratic policy are defeo-
tive precisely where they are required to be
strongest. They do not touch the governing
facts of the case. They leave the realities of
reconstruction solid as ever-the executives,
the legislatures, the voting body all as they
are now. If, as the World asserts, reconstruc-
tion may be undone by and through these
instrumentalities, the result promised by the
Democrats becomes remote indeed, for this
theory presupposes the readiness of the
colored people to disfranchise themselves,
and to invest with absolute power the men
who declare them permanently inferior and
subordinate.
Hence the favor with which General Blair's
proposition is regarded by the great body of
the Democrats. They have no patience for
the sophisms and nice distinctions with which
the doctrinaires of the party cucumber the
reconstruction controversy. They have made
up their minds to destroy the work of Con-
gress, and tolerate only those means of ac-
complishing it which commend themselves as
direct and certain. The Blair programme is
the one that satisfies this requirement The
intervention of the Supreme Court, and the
slow process of change by methods prescribed
by the new Constitutions, fall short of the
standard. Blair hit it with his letter. Dis
carding circumiocution, despising false pre-
lenses, he proposes simple revolution. Sey-
mour is to play the usurper, aud by sheer
force clear away the results of reconstruction.
| The Governments, the officials, the colored
| voters, are all to be swept aside. The mere
| will of the Democratic party is to determine
| the meaning of the Constitution, the rights of
the States, and the absolute authority of
whites over blacks. This programme un-
| questionably involves violence, disturbance,
and insurrection. 1t is, however, the only
programme which found favor in the eyes of
the New York Convention, for though revolu-
! tionary, it is logical, consistent, and effective
Now let us outrage probability by sup
| posing a Democratic triumph IN November.
| Let us assume the election of Seymour, and
the ability of the Democratic party to grapple
! with the issue raised by their platform. The
assumption is extravagant, and, in fact, pos
sible only by the Blair method. There is no
possibility of controlling the next Congress, or
| the Senate for years to come, and therefore
| none of adopting the constitutional plan pro-
pounded by Mr.. Stanbery. There must be
usurpation on the part of the President, and
| revolution, or the war upon reconstruction will
| end. To understand fully the dilemma of the
| Democrats, however, it is necessary to look
beyond these obstacles, to throw aside all
| probabilities and to bring the party face to
face with the responsibilities attendant upon
success.
What would then occur? Reconstruction
is to be overthrown because unconstitutional,
and therefore, in Democratic parlance, null
and void. What do they propose as its sub
stitute! These new governments are to be
set aside to make room for the governments
which preceded them. The present officials
are to be dismissed, and those whom Congress
legislated out of Office reinstalled. The exist
ing suffrage-bass is to give way to the basis
which Congress demolished. But the govern
ments which are to be thus re-established-
the system which is to be thus revived-were
notoriously without shadow of constitutional
authority. They were the products of Mr.
Andrew Johnson's exercise of authority. BY
mere executive order, without 9
shadow of legal sanction, he destroyed
the then existing Rebel governments, pre-
scribed the terms and manner of their reor-
gapization, dictated the qualifications Of
electors and officials, and the amendments tc
the State Constitutions, and, in fact did all
without warrant of law, which Congress ha:
ever proposed to do through the law. When
therefore, the Democrats propose to destroy
the existing State organizations of Mr.. John
SOD, they propose to do away with the results
of law and to revive the results of Executive
usurpation. The organizations they favo
never had pretense of consttutionality. Bu
they were in the interest of the Rebels, anG
that alone explains the preference. The out
cry about constitutionalitY is a sham. They
are anxious only to restore Rebel influences Il
power. Provided this be done, they are a
indifferent to the Constitution as to the right
of the millions over whom Mr. Johnson
governments tyrannized.