The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1869-01-13
The New Movement.


have appointed Superintendent JOHN e.
MASON and Assistant Superintendent J. Is.
JET, WILLIAM B. CoAKLEY, JOHN Bill
LrxesIEY, and County Canvasser J. ).
Mason, delegates to represent King George
In the convention to be held in Richmond
on the 10th day of February next, and in
structed them to oppose the movement
lately begun in this city in favor of univcr-
sal suffrage and universal amnesty. They
award "full credit for their patrioticic mo-
tives'' to the gentlemen engaged in the
conference. This is the proper mode OF
action. If the people wish to speak out in
opposition to the new plan Of reconstruc-
ton, let them send their delegates to the
State Convention with full authority to do
30; but in doing 30 it is not necessary to
impuen the motives Of gentlemen who en-
terrain different opinions. We confess our
own inability to see aught Of wisdom in the
course recommended by the opponents Of
this movement; yet we have not the least
inclination to denounce them. Even if the
efforts Of our committee at Washington
shall fail in obtaining the relief sought
for, and we be compelled to fight the
BATSE-U UNDERWOOD constitution just as it
came from the hands Of it's vagabond
authors, we shall nevertheless have gained
signal advantage from the attempt.
II will have deprived the Radicals of the
opportunity of justifying themselves before
their constituents by declaring, as they
have heretofore done, that the people Of the
South are sulleD, obstinate, and contuna-
cious, refusing all offers made to them, and
making none themselves. 1t will be evil
dence that the Constitution was defeated
because of its Ubiquitous features, and not
because the people of Virginia are unwil-
ling to have their State restored to the
Union. 1t will, in word, justify us in
the eyes of the people of the North for put
ting forth our utmost exertions to prevent
the ratification of the BAYNE- UNDERWOOD
abortion, and save US from such legislation
Of proscriptive nature as would otherwise
most certainly have followed it's rejection.
We have already reproduced articles from
the papers edited by TnrRLow WEED and
HORACE GREELEY, which are of Themselves
sufficient evidence that the "twenty-eight
acted wisely in making. the proposition they
did to Congress-. We now copy from the
New York Times, edited by Hon. HENRY j.
RAYMOND, the following paragraphs tend
ing to prove the same thiDg-namely, that,
whether successful or not in securing uni
versal amnesty for universal suffrage, the
Virginia committee has already rendered
valuable service to our people. We quote
from the Times Of Monday:
"THg COMPROMISE MOVEMENT rs VIRGINIA.
"The Virginians now in Washington to urge
upon Congress the views adopted by the re-
cent Richmond conference represent move
ment which is mt least entitled 10 respect
They are neither extravagant in their demands
nor in temperate in their advocacy OF compro-
mise. They declare frankly their aversion TO
universal negro acknowledgements IN the ao-
gtract, but rs frankly accept the 1act when
events have forced upon them; asking only
that it shall be accompanied by removal OF
the prescription which the new constitution
imposes, and of the single disability attendant
npon reconstruction. They would associate
universal amnesty with universal suffrage ms
the basis of restoration for the State in whose
name they profess TO speak II does not FOL
low that this is the only shape in which the
gentlemen who figure rs leaders OF the move
ment would be con tent to accept the !mpend-
ing change. They see that it Is inevitable
that no opposition they or others can offer Will
avail to Illustrate the reconstruction OF Nir-
ginia. They declare what in their opinion is
desirable, but they perform their task in
spirit go rational, and withal so just, that
they may be expected TO acquiesce in terms
not quite so favorable, IT, after fun discus |
sion these alone shall be found feasible.
" Reasonable as are the conclusions arrived
at by the Richmond committee, we apprehend
that circumstances scarcely justify their I'M
qualified adoption as the groundwork OF con- !
gressional action. The reconstruction law |
must, for many reasons, be left to run It's |
course. There can be no exceptional legisla- |
ton In respect OF Virginia without creating
while neither of the latter States is in n con-
diton to seek the notifications sought in be-
half of Virginia. The law which has already
vindicated itself in seven States may be pro
perly allowed to perform its work in the re-
naming three. For this reason, universal
amnesty as part of reconstruction seems i'm
practicable AS a consequence of reconstruc-
ton, when they who have been it's opponents
exhibit an honest acceptance of the situation,
1t may be desirable. The Republican party,
indeed, is pledged to 1t so soon as it may be
undertaken safely. and we have no doubt that
in brief period it will be realized This will
not occur, however, until after all the States
shall have been res tored. AZ
but though the Virginia committee will
probably not make much Roadway on the sub.
ject OF universal amnesty, we trust that their
labors will have the effect of inducing Con-
gress to employ Its reserved authority over
the constitution proposed Fur the State. With
ont attempting TO Introduce any essential
change Of the law, Congress may, and should,
require the proposed instrument TO harmonic
with the Federal enactment. This it ut pre-
sent fails to do. For the recons truction acts
mis- in hands of Congress- final control
over the whole Quest ion of disa blities, whereas
the Virginia constitution enacts prescription
in form which Congress could not possibly
reach. Either, therefore, Congress must exer-
else its revsory power with special reference
to the proscriptive features OF The pending
local constitution, or 1t will find its own au-
thority in the matter OF disabilities nullifled
by local law.
Judge Underwood, we observe, antici-
pates this effect, and seeks to counterfeit 1t by
Misrepresentation. He alleges that the pro-
posed constitution merely embodies the pro-
visions OF the reconstruction acts in regard to
Acknowledgement; the truth being that, after
the preliminary stage, these acts impose no
Acknowledgement, while the Virginia 'consti-
tuition would virtually render 1T perpetual
The Underwoods who framed the constttu-
tion had q purpose, no doubt; and the desire
for supremacy which animated them in the
convention will surely induce them to re-
sist conciliatory counsels. They are more anx-
ious TO dominate in Virginia than TO promote
the harmony of its people. 1t is 10 be hoped
that Congress will take brosder view of its
duty, and while firmly adhering to the es-
sentials Of reconstruction as defined by lis
own acts, will cordially reciprocate the over
lures of moderate men who now seek the
gradual obliteration of causes of quarrel.
Their approaches are nquestionably dictated
by necessity, but the opportunity they afford
Is one which timely wisdom and generosity on
the part Of Congress may turn 10 profitable
account. The time is favorable to modera
tion If not to magnanimity. Tho excitement