Year: 1866

In his reply to the Committee from the Phila-
do1nb;a Convention, Andrew johnson uttered a
view which if correct, creates a serious doubt as
to his right to as President of the United States
S,nffed with Hattery and blinded by egotsm, as
he ;s il is not likely that he saw the weak point
in his own situation exposed, but it is not hidden
tom the country. He said-s There is a BODY
whicb has assumed to be the Congress of the
Irn;ted States but which is in fact Congress of
onlv a part of the States,' etc. This is not the
6rst nor the second time that Mr.. johnson has
,r;ad N weaken the moral power of Congress- tn
strnethen his own position; and for the sake oe
the argument. admitting the force of his mean
inc let us see how it will affect his own office
and ultimately the right and power of secession.


The Thirty-ninth Congress is composed of the
REPRESENTATIVES and Senators of but twenty-six
States Eleven communities that were States in
1861, are unrepresented. This Congress, then.
does not represent the old United States, but
new United States but as the President main
tains that the old United States never in law
ceased to exist in any of its parts, this Congress
is not a lawful or Constitutional body and never
was-and never could have enacted auytbinq
lawfully or Constitutionally binding on the eleven
States not represented in it. Hence it follows
that the Constitutional Amendment PROPOSING
emancipation was not lawfully proposed and
must be a nullity, because this Congress was





to the Johnsonian Interpretation and so. eman-
cipation if it has been lawfully effected at all
must rest upon the Presidential proclamations
But if Congress, representing only twenty-sx
States was not lawful Congress, how can the
President, elected by the same States and no
more, be lawful President? 1t is impossible
If Congress is an usurping body, the President
is usurper, and it logically follows that Eman-
cipation Proclamation is nullity. True the
Cont oil tn inst tln md De-,
bons yieldetLto Republican force, because for the
present they cannot help themselves but that is
not to prevent their restoring slavery whenever
the normal condition of things shall have been
restored no more than Charles II was withheld
from the throne of his father or Louis XVIII
from that of his brother, after many years of Re-
publican rule. Indeed, by the Johnsonian view,
ii becomes every mans duty who loves the Con-
stitution and respects the law to aid in the res
toration of slavery, and far as in him lays, in
undoing what has been done by the usurping
Congresses for five and the President of the last
two years. Not one act of theirs or either of
them is entitled to the least respect nor will it
receive the least respect if the johnson party
any farther than may accord with the
plans and wishes of those who are to control that
party. If, as Mr.. Johnson argues. they have the
law and the Constitution their side, and in
addition to these aqure the political power,
what is to stay them in the restoration of slav
cry. in the repudiaton of the National debt
in fine from changing all their State Constitu-
tons back as they were in 1861 and the Federal
Constitution it was at that time? for if the
amendment is a nullity by lack of rightful power
in Congress to propose it, it is not now part of
that instrument. Moreover, if johnson is right
in regarding this Congress as less than a lawful
Congress of the United States, and himself
less than the Constitutional President of the
United States it follows that by secession, it is
in the power Of any one State or half dozen of
States, to pnt an end to all lawful and Constitu-
tional exercise of authority by the Federal Gov
crnment over the seeded States. The PROPOSE
tisn virtually admits the power of any State to
destroy the Federal Government.