Newspaper Page Text
()t our local politics, I can speak fa
vorably, as compared to what was the
j ict six months since. We have, I
believe, but four or five white Radicals in
'be county, and only two “to the manor
born.” One of them, it is said, boasts
t h a t he is the blacked black Republican in
the Southern States. But, he is power
less and can do the country but little
} janl i. Asa writer, in the days of Know
Nothingism, he used to “ sign himself
Jhe name his father gave him,” now lie'
M‘- us himself the name infamy has given
him. The other was paid to do the
dwy work of the party —to get all the
Negroes to register he could, and prevent
us many true men. The writer knows
of what he writes, having* to contend
» gainst the woikings of the native
Radical in his efforts to prevent the
writer’s registration. The others are
exotics. One of them was elected Ordi
narv, but he cannot obtain board and get
lodging at Appling. Even the Negro,
w ho had partially promised to board
him, has now repented ot his sins, and is
uow an outspoken Democrat, and has re
fused to hoard the Carpet-bagger. I
rather opine he will find the road to the
Ordinary’s office, a “hard road to travel.”
The Negroes are fast becoming con
vinced of their error in their affiliation
with the Jacobins, and arc fleeing the
•wiath to come,” and, by November, we
hope to make up a good record for this
county.
01 the crops, 1 can only say, in my
judgment, there will not be over half a
crop of cotton made. That is, I mean
the crop of 1868 will not come up to that
0 f 1867 by one-half. About the first of
Au r ust, our crops were looking well, and
doing well —as good as we could wish
and expect —but a drought set in then,
which lasted two weeks, with very hot
sun, and, lo! a great change was observed;
for fields then had an appearance of
scalded vegetation; wilted and languish
ing was the cotton stalks, as if the
dreaded simoon had passed over them.
Then, heavy and continued rains set in,
the result of which was to precipitate to
the ground all squares, forms, and small
bolls, and, in some instances, even the
leaves. There is complaint of the cater
pillar in some localities, but I have not
seen them in my crop. Ido not think
they can injure the crop now, as there is
little or no fruit to mature. I think we
shall have finished picking cotton by the
last of October. The July and August
crop of fruit is gone —leaving only the
first crop of bolls on the stalk. But, we
are thankful that we are making enough
of the staff of life. Planting on a large
scale is not thought of; our labor is not
reliable. Hence, the traveller in passing
through our county now, will see a great
change in the appearance of plantations.
The long lines of tall fences, under the old
regime, is no longer visible; but, instead,
will bo seen abandoned places, old fields
grown up in broom sedge, and broken
down fences These lands could be re
claimed, and by wise and judicious man
agement, under European tillage, could
be made to pay —not, however, uuder the
present order of things. The heavy taxes
imd r which labor and industry groans
and languishes, must be removed before
planting can be made a profitable invest
lm nt, even under the superior tillage of
the Swiss, the German, or the English
man. And this must be done by hurling
from power and place, the devils who
now control the legislation of the country.
This can be done —must be done—will be
done. The ides of November will pro
claim the glad tidings of Radicalism
overthrown and Democracy triumphant.
Columbia.
Banner of the South. —We are high-'
ly gratified to note the receiving of the
Banner of the South, a paper of rare ex
cellence in all its departments, and de
voted to the cause of Right, and Truth,
and Justic e It is published at Augusta,
Ga., by the R ev. Father Ryan, a gentle
man evidently of exalted Christian vir
tues and ardently attached to the time
hon Ted institutions of onr country. We
pro. ;ct for this paper an extended circu
mtioii throughout the country, and we
pro -m e that it cannot fail to leave a good
impression upon every reader. Even
those who dissent from Father Ryan’s
political views ipust admire the candor
and boldness with which he deals with
every subject which presents itself.
Havilah ( Cal.) Weekly Courier.
Horatio Seymour has ever been the
firm, fast friend and champion of the
workingman’s interests. This is why the
workingmen are rallying so enthusiasti
cally to his support.
<•
he public debt, on the Ist of Septem
ber, 1867, was $2,492,782,365, and on
the Ist of September, 1868, $2,534,614,-
313 ; showing an increase of $42,830,948
during the past year.
LETTER FROM
HON. H. V. JOHNSON.
In Reply to the Executive Committee of the
Democratic, Party of Troup County, In
viting him to Address the Grand Mass
Meeting held in La Grange , Ga ., Sept.
16th, 1868.
Sandy Grove, Jefferson co., Ga., \
September 12, 1868. j
Gentlemen : I duly received your polite
invitation, in behalf of the Dernoerac3 T of
Troup county to address them, at a mass
meeting and barbecue, on the 16th inst.,
at La Grange. In the event that I cannot
attend, you ask a letter from me “on the
political situation. ” As professional en
gagements will prevent my presence at the
meeting, I cheerfully comply with your
latter request.
How rapid is the flight of time and what
changes it works in the circumstances and
hopes of individuals and the affairs of na
tions ! The lapse of the last eight years
seems to be but a span. But how striking
the contrast between the picture of’lß6o
and that of 1868 ! Our country was pros
perous and happy. The States were unit
ed as co-equals. From the Lakes to the
Pacific, the people enjoyed the blessings of
peace, and every branch of industry was
crowned with ample reward. All this was
the fruit of that wise system of govern
ment established by our forefathers, and
the compact of Union between the States,
cemented by the Constitution of 1787. But
war, cruel, unnatural,unjust and unconsti
tutional war, intervened and left wide
spread desolation in its track of fire and
death. Hundreds of thousands of our
bravest and best have been consigned to
bloody graves,and the people,impoverished
by plunder, spoliation and confiscation, are
saddled with many thousand millions of
of debt, the payment of which will absorb
the earnings of several succeeding genera
tions. In the midst of desolated homes
we weep over the graves of our gallant
dead, mourn the subversion of the Consti
tution, and tremble with the apprehension
that popular liberty is threatened with de
struction. The heel of the oppressor is on
our necks, and upon the ruins of our cher
ished State government a fabric has been
erected, by strange and hostile hands,
through the forced agency of a constitu
ency unknown to the Constitution—a
fabric, which is the miserable spawn of
usurpation and the bantling of the sword,
dripping with unrighteous blood.
Intending to be as brief as possible, I
shall not pause to recount, in detail, the
grievances which have been inflicted upon
us since the surrender of the Confederate
arms. How the term3 of surrender—
simple and magnanimous—have been dis
regarded; how we have been excluded
from representation in Congress, in viola
tion of the Constitution and every prin
ciple of sound policy and wise statesman
ship; how we have been taxed without
representation, and forced to obey laws af
fecting our every interest, social, civil and
political, jo the enactment of which we
were denied any voice or participation;
how civil government has overthrown,
our State subjected to arbitrary military
despotism, the privilege of the writ of
habeas corpus - suspended in the time of
peace, our citizens imprisoned without
warrant, denied the right of trial by jury
and tried by military courts, for alleged
offences; in fine, how, in a thousand ways
and by means the most odious, we have
have been harassed, perplexed, insulted,
oppressed and sought to be dishonored.
With all these things you are too familiar
to need to be reminded. We have borne
all with unparalleled patience, looking and
hoping for the day of our deliverance
through the quiet, but potent instrument
ality of the ballot-box. When we sur
rendered our army we thought the strife
was ended. We surrendered in good faith,
and, in good faith, we have observed
the terms of surrender. Chagrined
and disappointed, as we have been,
in our expectations of seeing the Union
•restored aud the Constitution preserved;
much as we have writhed and chafed un
der the wrongs which have been heaped
uj on us ; bitterly as we have complained
of the oppressive bearing of the dominant
power, let it be said to the honor of a
brave but overpowered people; yes, let
it be written with a pen of iron, that the
inscription may go down to future ages,
that we never have contemplated forcible
redress ; never, the renewal of the war ;
never, any means looking to revolution.
Our earnest desire has been, and still is,
to see the Union restored upon the basis
of the Constitution ; and baffled as all our
hopes have been for nearly three years,
we still look to the justice and reason of
our countrymen. Our appeal is now be
fore the grand inquest of the American
people, and the day ot trial is near at
hand. We appeal to their patriotism and
their devotion to constitutional govern
ment and popular liberty; we appeal, in
behalf of the equality of the States, in
behalf of the sovereignty of the people of
the resoective States and their inalienable
right of self-government, and in behalf of
the solemn compact of 1787 as the su
preme law of the land ; we appeal to them
by the memories of the past, the sufferings
of the present, and the perils that darken
the future, by a common brotherhood of
political associations and kindred blood,
and by every consideration that should
move the hearts of patriots and elevate
the minds of statesmen. We implore them
to say to the storm-tossed sea, “peace, be
still ’ Our voice is for peace ; that peace
which springs from an association of co
equal btaies not the unity of nationality
that were the offspring of the sword,
centralism and despotism —but the Union
of the Constitution.
But I prefer rather to consider, briefly,
the great issues involved in the pending
election, in order that we may act intelli
gently in their decision. The main ques
tion affects the character ot the Govern
ment itself—the fundamental principles ot
its organization—the very object which
the Constitution was intended to accom
plish. In defining that object, I cannot
do better than to use the language of Mr.
Webster, in his speech at Albany, New
York, on the 27th of August, 1844. Ido
so, the more readily, because his author
ity cannot be disregarded by the people of
the North, on whom will, mainly, devolve
the responsibility of deciding the political
contest now being waged between the two
great parties of the United States. He
said : “That the object of this Constitu
tion was to make the people of the United
States one people, and to place them un
der one government, in regard to every
thing, respecting their relation to foreign
States and the aspect in which the nations
of the world were to regard them. It
was not an amalgamation of the whole
people under one government ; not an ex
tinguishment ot the State sovereignties.
That would have been an extinction, not
a Union, of existing States There was
no pressing necessity, therefore, for mak
ing the local institutions ot the several
States approach each other in any closer
affinity. As governments existed, each,
within its own territory, for all purposes
of territorial supremacy and power, in a
word, for all State purposes, it was no
matter what variety the States should
have, in these respects, and it was left to
their own discretion. And it is the very
beauty of our system, as I conceive, that
the Federal and State governments are
kept thus distinct; that local legislation is
left to the local authorities, and the gene
ral legislation is given to the General Gov
ernment.” The position of Mr. Webster
evidently was, that so far as concerned the
affairs of external relations, the Constitu
tion of the United States, constituted us
one people, and that, as between the seve
ral States, it constituted them co-equal
confederates, each being left to itself “for
all purposes of territorial supremacy and
power, in a word, for all State purposes.”
Whether the first member of this proposi
tion be true or not, the second is unques
tionably true, and that is quite sufficient
for the present discussion. That is the
principle which is most vital to the States,
and which is so fiercely assailed by the
present dominant party.
In the Convention of 1787, that framed
the Con-titution, there was a formidable
party —formidable for its patriotism and
ability—that advocated a strong National
Government, in contradistinction to a Fed
eral Republic. Mr. Hamilton was in favor
of clothing the national Legislature with
the ‘ ‘ power of passing all laws whatsoever , ’ ’
without any constitutional limit, except the
Executive veto, and of giving the authorß
ty to the President to appoint the Govern
ors of the several States. Mr. Randolph,
of Virginia, proposed that Congress should
have the power to negative all the acts
passed by the Legislature of the several
States, aud to coerce the States, by force,
to submit to the acts of Congress. Mr.
Patterson, of New Jersey, concurred gen**
erally in these propositions. All of
the three, with others, advocated the
opinion that the Supreme Court of the
United States should be invested with the
power to review and reverse the decisions
of the respective State Courts. Hence, it
appears that propositions were offered and
advocated in the Convention, giving to the
General Government supreme power over
the States, in their Executive, Legislative
and Judicial departments. Without tracing
the action of the Convention, in detail,
suffice it to say they were all either entirely
ignored or rejected; none of them—not
one—is to be found in the Constitution
that was adopted. The equality of the
States was maintained; their separate
sovereignty was unimpaired, except to the
extent of the powers delegated to the Gen
eral Government; and to clear away all
doubt, as to their sovereignty, a subse
quent amendment, proposed by Congress,
declares, in express terms, that “the pow
ers not delegated to the United States, by
the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to
the States, are reserved to the States re
spectively, or to the people.” The power
of the General Government was limited to
the conduct of affairs pertaining to foreign
relations, the regulation of commerce, coin
ing money, declaring war and making
peace, raising armies, collecting revenue
and a few other subordinate objects; while
each State retained the right or self-gov
ernment, to regulate elective franchise,
within its own limits and to organize its
own social, civil and political institutions.
The Constitution was adopted by the sev
eral States in convention, 'voting by States ,
and it was ratified by the several States,
each in its corporate character, and not by
the whole people of the United States, in
the aggregate as one people. Such was
the Government ordained by the Consti
tution of 1787 —a Federal Republic, of
co-equal States, with limited powers—
limited as to the subjects confided to it,
and limited as to the mode of exercising
its delegated powers. It was so under
stood, by the framers of the Constitution ;
so understood, by eyery President from
Washington to Lincoln ; so understood,
by . every distinguished jurist of the
United States; so understood, by all the
most eminent statesmen who have illustra
ted our past career ; and above all, by all
the States, when they severally ratified
the Constitution. Well might Mr. \Veb
ster say, as he did say, in the extract pre
viously quoted : “And it is the very beau
ty of our system, as I conceive, that the
Federal and State governments are kept
thus distinct ; that local legislation is left
to the local authorities, and the general
legislation is given to the §eaeral govern
ment.’! It is not only the "‘the beauty, n
but, I will add, the whole efficiency “of our
system.” Destroy its Federal feature of
compact between co-equal States, and
thenin the language of Mr. Webster,
it is “an extinction, not aun ion of existing
States .”
.Its wisdom is vindicated by our past
history. It had given us prosperity, peace
and happiness, up to the time, when, ap
prehended departures from it drove the
Southern States into secession. Our ter
ritory had extended to the Pacific Ocean :
our population, hardy, thrifty and enter
prising, had increased without a parallel;
in agriculture, manufactures and com
merce, we had risen to successful competi
tion with the most flourishing nations of
the old world our flag was respected on
every sea and in every clime ; and, in fine,
we .had risen to the first rank among
nations. Such are tho results of adherence
to the Union, as a compact between co
equal States, from 1787 to 1861.* But the
Presidential contest of 1860, resulted in
the election of a sectional President, by a
sectional party, pledged to a line of policy
which the Southern States consid
ered fatal to their rights and safe
ty in the Union. In an hour of just in
dignation, they committed the mistake of
secession. That mistake provoked the
crime of coercion, and coercion has open
ed the gate to that turbib tide of aggres
sion and usurpation, which has swept
away all constitutional barriers and
threatens to drift us into the stagnant
sea of Despotism. Fully appreciating the
dangers that environed us, upon the ac
cession of Mr. Lincoln to the Presiden
cy, I was still unwilling for Georgia to
secede. I thought it better that party
should battle with party, section with
section, inside the Union, for the adjust
ment of conflicts of interest, principles
and policy. I thought it better, because
secession was no redress for past griev
ances, and I doubted its adequacy to save
us from greater future ills. But when
Georgia took the step, though adverse to
my judgment, I obeyed her behest and
linked my destiny with her people. And
now that we are all overwhelmed in com
mon defeat, and adversity, I cordially
unite with them, in this last effort, to re
store the Union and, if possible, preserve
constitutional government.
I have shown that the Constitution of
the United States, as it emanated from
its authors, ordained and established an
Union, between co-cqual States —a Fed
eral, in contradistinction to a National,
government, and that, in this pecular
feature, consists “its beauty” and efficien
cy, to which we are indebted for all the
prosperity that we have hitherto enjoyed.
I will next show that the past meas
ures and avowed future policy of the
dominant party, whether so designed or
not, must, if made permanent, destroy its
federal feature, and convert our govern
ment into an elective centralism which,
like Aaron’s rod, will swallow up the re
served rights of the States and extinguish
“the State Sovereignties,” forever. It can
not be denied that, if the Convention of
1787 had incorporated into ithe Constitu
tion the proposition of Mr. Hamilton, to
confer on Congress the “power of passing
all laws whatsoever” and upon the Presi
dent, the authority to appoint the State
Governors; and the proposition of Mr.
Randolph, to give to Congress the right
to negative all acts passed by the several
State Legislatures, and to coerce the
States to submit to all acts passed by
Congross; and the proposition of Mr. Pat
terson, to clothe the Supreme Court of the
United States with the power to review
and reverse the decisions of the State
Courts—l say if these propositions had
been adopted, it cannot be denied, that
our government, instead of being Federal ,
would have been National —an elective
Centralism. Rut the party in power has,
in fact, or effect, exercised all these ter
rific powers. The Convention refused to
give Congress the right to coerco States.
This party has assumed and exercised it.
The Convention refused to make the Gen- 1
eral Government supreme over the Exec
utive, Legislative! aud Judiciary depart
ments of the several States; but Congress
has usurped and exercised such suprem
acy over ten States of the Union. It has
asserted the right to dictate the formation
of their constitutions; by its own enaet-
meats, it has deposed their Governors
and Judges and regulated the question
of citizenship and the elective fran
chise. Congress has gone even beyond
all this. It has emasculated the con
stitutional functions of the Federal Exec
utive, fettered the Supreme Court of the
United States, and _so intimidated Rs
Judges that they shrink from the decis
ion of cases involving the constitutionality
of the Reconstruction Acts. # lf these
are not alarming strides to Centralism, it
is difficult to conceive what would be. If
these do not tend to overthrow Constitu
tional government, in the name of reason
and justice, what measures of legislation
would lead to the result? Hut this great
party of Centralism glory in their achieve
ments and, in the Chicago Platform, con
gratulate the country upon their success,
and pledge themselves to perpetuate and
make permanent their policy—that is to
erect an elective despotism upon the ruins
of our Constitutional Republic. We have
seen the benign fruits of the Constitution,
produced through a period of eighty years of
peace and prosperity ; how we advanced in
all the ele nents of greatness and power.
Now, what are the fruits of less than three
years administration of the government, in
disregard of that Constitution, and upon
the principles of Centralism? They are
sectional hatred and strife, prolqnged and
intensified; the Union dissevered; ten
otates denied equality and representation ;
governments forced upon them by the
bayonet; agriculture, commerce and manu
l k tUr j S industry paralysed;
labor deranged, demoralized and subvert
ed- an overwhelming and crushing public
debt, n flat true patriot North, South,
Last or West will hesitate to repudiate
tms most egregious policy of despotism
anu restore to its wonted supremacy, the
Constitution of our forefathers?
In order to sustain the general charge of
the tendency of the measures and policy of
the dominant party to Centralism and Des
potism, let us consider some of their sdo
cmc acts: K
I. From the foundation of the govern
ment, the right of the several States to fix
the qualifications of citizens).ip and suf
frage, has never been doubted, much less
denied. But, in the Reconstruction Acts,
Congress has assumed absolute control
oyer this whole subject, so far as concerns
the ten Southern States, to which those
acts apply. Slavery being abolished, they
confer citizenship and the right to vote up
on the negroes of those States, together
with social, civil and political equality,with
the white population; and with this, they
couple disfranchisement of the latter to an
extent supposed to be sufficient to give to
the former the ascendancy at the ballot*
box. By a pretended amendment to the
Constitution, this Radical change, in our
system is guaranteed to be perpetual; whilst
it is distinctly announced in the Chicago
platform “that it was demanded by every
consideration of public safety, of gratitude
and of justice and must be maintained '.”
IB . The equality of the States,in rights
and dignity, is fully recognized, in numer
ous provisions of the Constitution. And
it was even declared, by unanimous resolve
of Congress, at the commencement of the
unhappy conflict of arms between the
States, that the war was not waged“in any
spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose
of conquest or of subjugation, nor for the
purpose of overthrowing *or interfering
with the rights of established institutions
of the States, but to defend and maintain
the supremacy of the Constitution and to
preserve the Union, with all the dignity ,
equality and rights of the several States
unimpaired ,” Ac. But in the face of those
recognitions of the equality of the States,
the Chicago platform boldly asserts that,
though the Southern States shall not de
cide, for themselves, the question of citizen
ship and suffrage,yet, that, in all the other
States, termed loyal, it properly belongs to
the people of those States.
111. Congress has not only asserted,
but exercised, the right o form and erect
new States within the jurisdiction of ten
of the States of the Ui|od, and decided
who shall constitute those States, irre
spective of the will of the people. Their
sovereignty has been overthrown ; anew
people, unknown to the Constitution and
the whole theory and practice of our politi
cal system, has been created, composed, to
a large extent, of emancipated slaves and
clothed with power to form State govern
ments. All this is in direct and palpable
conflict with the 3rd Art. and 4th sec. of
the Constitution, which declares, among
other things, * * * “that no new State
shall be formed or erected, within the
jurisdiction of any other State * * *
without the consent of the Legislatures of
the States concerned, as well as of the
Congress.” What is a State in the sense
we are now considering ? It is not mere
territory, embracing mountains and val
leys, plains and rivers ; but it means the
civil organization of a community into Ex
ecutive, Legislative and Judiciary powers
—thus the actual government. Vattel de-
State to be “a body politic or socie
ty of meu united together for the purpose
of promoting their usual safety and ad
vantage by the joint efforts of their com
bined . strength.” Such a government
Georgia had, fully organized and opera
tive, “deriving its just powers from the
consent,’of the governed” aud founded upon
the sovereignty of the people. Congress
abolished that government and suppressed
the sovereignty of the State. It deter
mined who should constitute the people of
the State. It compelled conventions, at
the point of the bayonet, to orgonize anew
government. It reserved to itself the
right to approve or reject the Constitution.
It' this is not the formation or rejection of
a “new State” within the jurisdiction of
another State, this language of the Consti-
tution is useless verbiage.
lam tempted to pause here and com
ment upon this monstrous _ wrong. Its
atrocity finds no parallel in history, unless
it be the destruction of the national
sovereignty of Poland in 1792 and her
partition between Prussia, Russia and
Austria —an act which has challenged the
execration of all Christian powers. But
nations, like individuals, are subject to the
law of retribution. In % less than twenty
years those proud despotisms received their
punishment. Surwarrow sacked Warsaw,
and the city of Moscow was laid in ashes
in sight of a Polish army led by Bonaparte.
How humiliating the treaty of Tilsit and
the Peace of \ ienna! by which the par
titioning powers lost as much territory as
they respectively acquired by the division
of their spoil! Such was the rapid ven -
geanee which Providence sent close upon
the heels of spoliation to demonstrate to
the world that the destruction of the sov
ereignty of a people is the most atrocious
of national crimes. It is not for me to
say what is the retribution that awaits
those who have, by force, suppressed the
sovereignty of ten States of this Union.
As I can pray for nothing better for the
South and the whole country, so I pray
5