Year: 1868

loyal Congress to say upon what terms
States lately In rebellion shall resume their
practical relations with tie government


Ii would be a strange feature in the Con-
stituiion which conlers the right upon a
rebel to do these things, instead or upon
the loyal people Of this government thro
their representatives in Congress. This is
indeed a singular feature, and Frank Blair
and his followers may have the sole right,
benefit and honor Of the wonderful dis
covery. MIR. Blair's position is plain upon
this point, for he says in unmistakable lan-
guage that we are To ''allow the white pco-
pie 10 organize their own governments"


suppose he means they have the consd


tutional right, but he has failed, as all
others will fail, 10 tell US where, in all the
be found single clause that justifies that
opinion or even limited at it. Let us ex-
anime their own theory upon this point,
viz:


That the ordinances of secession took
these States out of the Union, alienated
them from this government. Then if they
were out of the Union, they were no part
of the Union. Then when their armies
surrendered, their situation was that of a
conquered foreign territory; then if that


was their condition, they had no right 10
say when and how they should be admit
ted into the Union as States they had no
right 10 say whether they ever would be
States in the Union or not. If that was


their position then The Government thro'
the National Legislature had a right to
make four, six, ten or as many
different States of their territory rs they
recognize the divisions of any conquered
foreign territory. II is the Government
which has the right to dictate terms to
its conquered, and not that the subdued
rebel shall dictate terms to the Govern
ment. Suppose we were to have war
with Great Britain and that Canada was
the bone of contention: IL Gen. Grant
should triumph over the British forces,
and plant our National standard upon Can


ada's capitol, would il be maintained that
Canada had right To demand and gain
admission into the Union upon her own
terms? Certainly not; yet if the Demo-
cratic doctrine is true, then Canada would
have as much right to demand admission
rs the rebel States, and these States as
much right is Canada, and no more. Up
on this theory the States have no right at
all, having forfeited all claim on the Gov


ernmcnt by rebelling against it.


The position of Congress is that these
States were never out of the Union; aliho'
not let them out, hence when the war end
cd, their "normll condition" was that OF
conquered and sublued rebels, who had
forfeited life, liberty, property and cira
goccr1imcnt. Ii they had forfeited these
rights then they had no right to come and
demand admission into the Union with
such constitution as they might see fit to
adopt. Ii is clear then that the govern
mcnt must prescribe terms Of admission 10
them, for it would be Incompatible with
the idea of patriotism and loyalty to moin-
tain that rebels could do il.


The next question to be determined is,
which of the departments of the Govern
meat Ii IS the power to do this Anircw
Johnson in the onset claimed that he was
the Government. q suppose he had been
consulting his dcmijphn on the subjeci,)
but as the Democratic party now conccdc
he has no power, l shall not attempt TO
discuss the dead issue of this dead duck,
but proceed to show where the power is,
10 frame Governments for the States lately
in rebellion. To provide for the recon
struclion of these States, requires ei,ter a
legislative action or an executive action
which OF the two it does require depends
upon the kind of labor to be performed.
Then that which is to be done first, is TO
enact laws as basis, upon which, and in
accordance with which, these States may
form their Constitutions. This duty then
belongs to the law-makiny power, the
leglslating power; and Article LIST of Sec.
lst of the Constitution says, ''All lesisla
tive powers herein granted shall be tested
iu a Congress of the United States, which
shall consist of Senate and House of
Representatives. 1t is clear then, that the
Congress is the proper power to form a
basis by legislation upon which these new
State Governments may be formed. This
proposition is of itself very conclusive;
but we have other grounds upon which the
power OF Congress may be safely rested.


Sec Sd OF Art. 4th of the Constitution
says: New States may be admitted by
the Congress in this Union. IL is evident
that by the phrase, 'New States" il has
reference to the Government OF a State.
1t does not refer TO The soil nor the people.
To illustrate: tue bill admitting Kansas to
become a State in the Union certainly did
not mean her soil, her territory, because
her soil already belonged to the United
States. 1t did not mean her people. for
her people were already citizens of The
United States territories, and as such wo'd
receive the same protection as citizens OF
a Slate at home or abroad. If that clause
of the Constitution then, does not mean
neither the soil nor the people, then we
must conclude, we are furccd 10 conclude
that it means new State government
Now let us make the application TO the
States lately in rebellion. What was their
condition at the close of the war? When
they passed the ordinance of secession.
they threw asidc~thc old State Govern


~. - 4 r - Il g. f.........a..., 49,,