Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1869-07-27


tute the only limitations to which the member
elect are exposed.
| Besides, the act of July 25th, 1868, admit
ting North and South Carolina, Louisiana
| Georgia Alabama and Florida 10 representa-
ton, neither said or did anything affecting the
conditions by which the oaths to be taken were
determined. General Canbys reference to this
approving legislation implies that in some un-
explained way it relieved him and Generals
Meade and Buchanan from the necessity of ex
acting the test-oath in their respective districts
But how? Does the act of admission specif-
caly set aside the test-oath as bearing upon
the Legislatures Of the States concerned p
Does it indicate anything by which district
commander could be relieved from what Gen.
Candy now maintains to be his duty? What
says the preamble?
Whereas the people of North Carolina,
South Carolina. Louisiana, Georgia Alabama
and Florida have, IN pursuance of the provl>-
ions of an act entitled An act for the more eff
fcient government of the rebel States, passed
March 2, 1867 and the acts supplementary
thereto. framed constitutions of State govern
ment which are republican, and have adopted
such constitutions by large majorities of the
votes cast at the elections held for the ratifica-
ton or rejection Of the same
AS result of these proceedings by the peo-
pie Of the States named, they were declared
entitled to representation in Congress when
their respective Legislatures should have rati-
fed the fourteenth amendment, and submit to
certain other Fundamental conditions
Now, there is nothing in the preamble or
body Of the act in question which aDsolved
Generals Meade, Candy and Buchanan from
any duty before mbent upon them. There
is simply recognition of the fact that with
the ratification of an acceptable constitution,
and the election Of Legislature and State Of
Gcers, the provisional condition of things
ended, and matters assumed shape fatal to
the rule under which district commander
could at will exact the test-oath,
What IS true then Of the six States named
in the act is true now of Virginia. Its people
have, by large maj ,Fity, adopted consltu-
ton to which the keenest-eyed republican can
not object. They have elected Legislature
which, under the terms Of the act passed at
the late session, will meet shortly to ratity the
fifteenth amendment, which is condiion-p pre-
cedent Of readmission to the Union. When
the subject comes before Congress. then the
record will show a constitution ratified and the
special condition Of the last act complied with
There is no reason now for enforcing the test
oath as against Virginians which was not ap-
plicable as against South Carolinians among
whom G.neral Candy did not enforce it.
The plea behind which Gen. Candy takes
shelter is predcated upon the supposition that
the Legislature just chosen IN Virginia is mere
ly provisional But the hypothesis is fala-
cious A 'so-called provisional Legislature,
having no legal status, could not ratify the if
t, enfh amendment, or boast OF the credentials
which the new Legislature of Virginia pos
sesses Elected in conformity with the recon-
struction acts, and concurrently with the adop-
ton of constitution prepared under their op-
eratnn by a convention whose members were
not REQUIRED to take the test-oa;h, the present
Legislature has rights which Gen. Candy can
neither give nor take away. lt is Legl>la-
ture whose organization and power are defined
by the local constitution, which, as adopted.
does not impose the test-oafh and it is simply
monstrous to suppose that Gen. Candy or any
general, by extortlng from the reconstruction
acts construction at variance with precedent
and common sense, may demand the accep-
tance of an oath which the people Of the State
have explicitly rejected Even Gen Canby
would not lay claim to the authority he pro-
fesses to exercise, if Congress had passed in re-
gard to Virginia an act akin to that passed on
the 25th Of June, 1868. Prac icaly, however.
the status of the Virginia Legislature, on as
seulbng few weeks hence, will be identical
with the status Of the South Carolina LegiSla-
ture after the enactment Of that law. Gen. Can
by did not pretend that he could exact the
te>t-oath in the one case, and he can have no
right to exact it in the other
We find no fault with Gen. Candy for obey
ing the law. We condemn his action because,
under the guise of upholding the law he puts
upon it a construction MT borne out by its
terms or by any analogy between provision
al Legislature and the Legislature elected last
Tuesday; a construction, moreover, discarded
by Gen Grant again and again in 1868, and
one that, rigidly enforced would render salts
factory reconstruction impossible
On the motives nf Gen Candy we do not
p esume to sit in judgment. 1t is unfortu-
nate for his own consistency that after calling
the attention of the government to the mischief
occasoncd by the test-oath in 5 g., at time
when it's exaction was imperatively required,
he should now endeavor to bring it into play in
Virginia at period when ali excuse for It's
exaction has ceased Still more unfortunate is
it that no intima,ion Of his purpose was given
in Virginia until after all nominations had been
made, and almost the eve of the election
reached until, in fact, the Wells party found
their cause hopeless before the people, and the
idea MAS formed of upsetting the popular YER
dict by resort to SOM. reckless method. The
moral strength of General Canby's position Is
weakened by suspicious identity OF opinion
and purpose between his order and the tactic,
which the defeated party threaten to employ.