Year: 1866

terms members from those States should
be admitted to seats in Congress The
declaration of Mr.. Lincoln in his las
speech, few days before his assassina
ton when he he gave his reas ons for hav
ing encouraged the people of Louisians
to form State Government, "Ihat ht
had never claimed the right TO say when
or whether members should be admitted
| to seats in Congress from the rebeliIous
States, was recognized as the corner
stone of the Executive policy in respect
to the reconstruction of those States. In
his annual Message. President johnson
did not controvert this proposition but
admitted that the Executive hal nothing
TO do with determing the question OF the
admission of members to seats in Con
gress, but that its consideration and de
cision belonged exclusively 10 Congress
1t was under such circumstances that
Congress met in Decemte At. Il found
the local governments of all the insur-
gent States organized under the Execu-
tive proclamations. with the exception
of Texas. 1t found marked differences
in the proceedings of the several Con-
ventions and Legislatures of those States
in respect to their manifestations OF 10y
atty TO the Federal Government. II
found, or thought it found. an almost
universal purpose among them 10 deny
to their colored population any of the
essential securities to their civil rights,
and determination TO perpetuate the
incidents OF Slavery to their fullest pos
sible extent 1t discovered; or believed
it discovered, from the evidence II re-
ceived of the brutal treatment of the
freedmen and of Union men. and the
disloyal utterances of the press, and OF
prominent citizens of the rebeillous
States, that there was little true loyalty
to the General Government among the
people Of those States, and that altho' gh
defeated in their armed treason against
the Government they were not prepar-
ed, consistently with the safety of the
nation, to Immediately enter upon and
enjoy all the rights and privileges of
Federal citizenship.


do not inquire whether Congress was
right in their suspicious or conclusions
1t is sufficient they had the suspicious,
and had formed such conclusions. 1t
was the law making power of the Gov
eminent, charged with the con stitutional
duty of not permitting any State to be
represented in its body whose Govern
ment was not, in its judgment, fully re
publican in form, nor the recognition of
whose full rights as State would imperil
the safety OF the nation. OF all such
matters, Congress was alone the Judge,
As no appeal could be made from its de-
cision but to the people, so no other au-
thority had the right to dirict or embar-
rass it in its deliberations or determine
tions, save the President, by his qualified





In any discussion of the difference be-
tween the President and Congress on the
subject Of reconstruction, it is of the
first Importance that their respective du-
ties in regard to it should be borne in
mind. 1t should rot be overlooked that
the President had virtually exhausted
his powers in relation to it upon the
meeting of Congress, which alone, after
that was authorized to act in the premises
subject only to the Presidents negative
already referred to.


MY purpose in dwelling at such length
on the subject of reconstruction Is, In
part. to assert for Congress the exclus-
i've control over it, and to deny to the
Executive branch of the Government any
power to interfere with the exercise OF
Of such control, save through the quail
fed negative of the President in matters
OF legislation / have one other object,
which is to vindicate Congress from the
charge of hasty or Incorporate legisla-
ton, and to express the opinion which l
now do, that it was the duty of the Pres
ident as well in view of his responsible
tiles as the Executive of the Government
as his obligations To the Union Repubii-
can party, to have approved the Consti-
tutional amendment, as il finally passed
Con noress. and to have given the infiu
ence of his administration for its ratifi-
cation by the State Legislatures.


1t cannot be overlooked that in the
controversy between the President and
Congress on the subject of reconstruct
ion. Congress has displayed the more
conciliatory spirit Indeed, the con
cessions have been wholly on its part.
The President has yielded nothing from
the position be assumed in his first veto of
the Freedmen's Bureau Bill in opposit-
ion TO Congress legislatiug in any mat
ter affecting the insurgent States until
they were represented in both branches
of Congress. The majority in Congress
on the other hand, waived the urging of
several questions regarded by prominent
members of either House as of almost





the following:


First: That the insurgent States had
by the act of Rebellion, Invested them
selves of all the rights and privileges of
States, and shonld be treated as Terri
tories until their State organizations were
renewed upon such conditions as Con
gress should prescribe s9iA


Second: That in view of the enormity
of the crime of rebellion, and as pre-
tection again: is. recurrence, as well to
meet the demsnds of justice, the estates
of leading traitors should be confscated
and appropriated to the uses Of the 10y
al freedmen. Union citizens of the South
who had been despoiled of their pro-
perty by the Rebel Government, and
to the payment of the public debt, and,


Third: That for the protection of the
colored population against oppression
and Injustice from the old master class
of the South, and to secure them in the
full enjoyment of all their civil rights
or, at least impartial suf-