The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1868-07-29

refrained from giving it any aid or counte
nance. l therefore conclude that the true
meaning of the resolution is, that ''no State,
a PORTION of whose inhabitants were enga-
ged in the rebellion, shall be permitted to
participate in the Presidential election, ex-
cept upon the terms therein prescribed. -
Assuming this to be the true construction of
the resolution, the inquiry becomes pertinent:
May those Northern States, a portion of
whose inhabitants were actually in the rebel
lion, be prevented, at the discretion of Con-
gress, from having their elelectoral votes
counted?
1t is well known that portion of the in
hsbitants of New York and Virginia were
alike engaged in the rebellion, and tits equal
ly well known that Virginia, as we'll as New
York, was, at all times during the war Iecog-
,pized by the Federal Government, each as a
'Sts1;-ip the Union, so clearly that upon the
termination of hostilities it was not even
deemed necessary for her restoration that a
Provisional Governor should be appointed :;
yet according to this Joint resolution, the
people of Virginia, unless they comply with
the terms it preScribes, are denied the right
of voting for President and Vice President,
while the people of New York, portion of
the inhabitants of which State were also in
rebellion, are permitted to have their electo-
raj votes counted without undergoing the
process of reconstruction prescribed for
Virginia
New York is no more State than Vir-
ginia- The one is as much entitled to be
represented in the Electoral College as the
other
CoNGREss UsURrs POWER or ELECTIoN.
If Congress has the power to deprive Vir-
ginia OF this right, it can exercise the same
authority in respect to New York OF any 9TH
er of the States thus the result of the
Presidential election may be controlled and
determined by Congress, and the people be
deprived of their rights under the Constitu-
lion to choose President and Vice Presi-
dent of the United Slates. If Congress
were to provide by law that the votes of
none of the States should be received and
II Cuot lOl NlAO
in political sentiment with majority of the
two Houses, suck legislation would at once
be considered by the country as unconstitu-
tional, and revolutionary usurpation of
power.
1t would, however, be exceedingly diff
cult to find in the Constitution any more au-
thority for the joint resolution under con-
slderation, than for an enactment eYoking
directly the rejection of all votes not IN ac-
cordance with the deep political preference
of a majority of Congress. No power e1-
lists in the Constitution authorizing the joint
resolution or the proposed law. The only
difference being that one would be more pal
pably unconstitutional and revolutionary
than the other one. Both would rest upon
the Radical error that Congress has the
power to prescribe terms and conditions as
to the right of the people of the States to
cast their votes for President and Vice Pres
ident. For the reasons thus indicated, am
constrained to return the joint resolution to
| the Senate for such further action thereon as
Congress may deem necessary.
ANDREW JOHNSON.
WAsulNGTON ID. C. July 90. 1865