Newspaper Page Text
OLI) SERIES, VOL. LXXVI.
(throiiiclc & irntiarl.
lIEIVm MOOIIE,
A. It. XVIt I(i I IT.
PATRICK. W ALSH, Associate Editor.
TKK.IIS OP SUBSCRIPTION.
dIILy.
.«,» •**
. . J»
“ ’ 1000
WEEKLY.
1 •»
'al (,I S'lA. (. V :
IV KK\ Ksn.u MOK.VI.VO, OCTOBER 23.
Reconstulction. — We devote a large
portion of our paper this morning to a
letter written hy Ifon. Hercbel V. John
son, to the New Y’ork Tribane, in which
paper it appeared on the 10th inst. It is a
temperate, digniiied and able State paper ;
the subject of which it treats being handled
in a masterly style.
Personal. — The many friends of our
esteemed fellow-citizen, Mr. Win. If.
Crane, Sr., will be pleased to learn that he
h now connected with the Fredericksburg
Store, where he will be glad to moot and
wait on his old customers.
Hr. L. DeLacee, Oculist, Physician
and Surgeon, formerly of Europe and the
West Indies, has arrived in our city, and
has taken rooms at the Augusta Hotel,
where he can in; consulted on all diseases
of the eye and ear. Attention is directed
to his advertisement to Ire found elso
wlicre in this morning’s paper.
A Fair.— We understand that the
ladic.; of the Catholic Church have in con
templation a fair for the benefit of tbe
Cutholi • Orphan Asylum, now being erect
ed on 'JVlfair street. They will have the
earnest co operation of all who are charita
bly inclined,
Hon. Hen,i. 11. Hill.—A dispatch from
Washington, dated Saturday, the 11th,
says:
Hon. ){. H. Hill, of Georgia, whose, let
ter- addressed to General Grant on the
Mil*. tary Reconstruction Acts have attract
ed so much attention in the South, lias ar
rived here, and will, to-morrow, have an
interview with the President.
Mr. Starks’ Letter.
In another column will be found a letter
from Mr. Win. 11. Starke, of this city, fully
vindicating himself from the charge of be
ing h member of a Loyal League, sai ! to
Im in existence in this city. This charge
having been published and reiterated in the
Augusta Chronicle <t /Sentinel, Mr. Starke
deni' any connection with such a League,
which, if it existed, is unknown to him.
We publish the remarks of the Chronicle
if Scntiu 1 and the letter, in justice to a
worthy citizen. ,Suv. AVim & Herald.
Will the astute editor of the Neivs &
Jlrahl inform us when the Chronicle <£
Sentinel “published the charge and re
iterated it, that Mr. Starke was a member
of the Loyal League ?” We deny having
made such a charge and call for proof.
Several weeks since we published ex
tracts from the constitution and by-laws
of a Republican Club or Loyal League
concern, having its existence in the city of
Savannah, together with a list ol officers
as wo found it in the pamphlet published
by authority of the League. The name
ofW. 11. Starke appeared in that list as
President of the Club or League, and so
we published it without affirming or deny
ing bis connection with it.
Wo desire to put another question to
the Newt, and it is induced by the insinu
ated doubt conveyed in the above extract
as to the existence in Savannah of a lie
publican or Loyal League organization.
We ask the News if it denies that there is
and has been for some time past a Loyal
League Association in its city ? Will it be
kind enough to answer ?
Federal Tortures and Indignities Upon
Peaceful Citizens.
Col. John I>. Weems has written a letter
to lion. 11. Clay Hean, of lowa, detailing the
tortures and erupl indignities inflicted upon
a family of peaceful and respected citizens
of Wilkes county, Ga., by the low, con
temptible brute, Brig. Gen. Edward A.
Wild, which should excite the execration
of every honest matt in the country.
Wo find Col. Weems’ letter in the
Macon Journal <f- Messenger of the 9th
inst., the able editor of which, states from
personal knowledge of the facts detailed,
that in Col. Weems’recital of the infa
mous conduct of Wild, there is a total
absence of exaggeration or calumny. Those
who know Col. Weeuis (and he is widely
known in this State), need no corroboration
for any statement ho may make. Col.
Weems in his letter (and we arc sorry that
want of space forbids our publication of
it entire), says:
When the Capital of the Confederate
States was evacuated, the spocie belonging
to the Richmond Banks was removed,
with the archives of the Government, to
Washington, Ga. Early after the close of
the war, a wagon train conveying this
specie from Washington to Abbeville, S.
C., was attacked and robbea of an amount
approximating to SIOO,OOO, by a body of
disbanded cavalry of the Confederate
army. A lew weeks subsequent to this
event, Brig. Gen. Edward A. Wild, with
an escort consisting of twelve negro sol
diers, under the command of Lieut. Sea
ton, of Capt. Alfred Cooley’s company
(lothh regiment of N. V. Volunteers),
repaired to the scene of the robbery, in the
vicinity i I" Hanburg, Wilkes county, Ga.
t>y the order of Gen. Wild, and in his pres
ence, A. L). Chenault, aMethodist Minister,
weighing -75 pounds, his brother John
X, Clumault, of fiioderate size, and a
son of the latter, only 15 years of age, but
weighing —3O pounds, were arrested and
taken to an adjacent wood where the money
abstracted from the train, or a portion of
it, was apposed to be concealed. Failing
to produce the money upon the order of
Gen. Wild, those three citizens, who enjoy
the esteem and confidence of all who know
them, were suspended by their thu.ibs,
witli the view ot extorting confessions as to
the plaee of its concealment. Mr. John
N. Chenault was twice subjected 1 1 this
torture, and on one occasion until he faint
ed, and was then cut down. Rev. A. H.
Chenault was also hung up twice by his
thumbs, and until Gen’l Wild was in
duced only by his groans and cries to re
lease him from his agony. The youth, A.
F. Chenault, was huug up once, and until
be exhibited evident signs of fainting,
when he was out down. Whilst this soeue
was being enacted, Gen’l Wild and his
subaltern were both present, directing the
whole operations. These citizens, with
the exception of John N. Chenault, who
was unable to be removed, were then sent
under guard to Washington, 15 miles
distant.
ilyth’ artier of Ga I Wild, a daughter
of John N. Chenault, about the age of 17
years, universally beloved in her neighbor
hood. and distinguished tor her piety, was
searched, by being stripped, in the pres
ence of the Lieutenant, who was charged
with the execution of the order. When
her -.rrincuts, piece by piece, were taken
from her and the very last one upon her
was reached, in the instincts of her na
tive modesty, she threw herself upon a bed
and sought to conceal her person with its
covering; she was ordered to stand out
upon the floor, until stripped to perfect
nakedness.
By the order of Gen'l Wild, the wife of
John X. Chenault was arrested and taken
under guard to Washington, where she
was incarcerated lor several days, on bread
aiid water, in one of the petit jury rooms
of the court house, and a. ter stie bad been
for-jd to leave at her home her nursing
ini nt, but nine months old. where it con
tinued to remain until its mother was re
leased.
During the period of her imprisonment,
Gen. Wilde was waited upon at hi- hotel
by three citizens of the county, to-wit:
Francis G. Wingfield, Richard T. Walton,
and your correspondent, who importune,!
this officer to permit one of the party to
take Mrs. Chenault to bis residence in tbe
village, each pledging his neck, and all
tendering bond, with security, in any
amount which he would be pleased to nom
inate, for her appearance at any time and
place in obedience to his order. This re
quest Gen. Wild promptly and emphatically
refused, but graciously allowed her friends
to supply her with suitable food, at the
place of herconfinetncnt.
The tortures and indignities thus inflict
ed upon this family, who are respected
and esteemed by all whoknew them, failed
to discover any evidence whatever of
their complicity in the robbery, or of any
knowledgo of the concealment of any of its
fruits.
The Grand Political Revulsion.
: SCENES IN WASHINGTON, PHILADELPHIA,
AND COLUMBUS.
Os the scenes and incidents of the elec
tion in the city of Philadelphia, on Tues
day. the Age of Wednesday says :
Last night was one never to be forgotten
by the Democratic party of Philadelphia.
It was one in which everything of the past
was forgotten in the glorious victory of
to-day. The defeats of the past eight
years had no weight in subduing the great
happiness that existed in the party. At
an early hour an immense crowd assembled
in front of the rooms of the Democratic
Association, at the corner of Ninth and
Arch streets. The scene there beggers
description. As tbe returns from the
several words were announced, showing
great Democratic gains in every ward,
cheer after cheer rent the air. The streets
were rendered utterly impassable by the
immense throng. We saw one individual
who walked along the street ■ laughing as
if he were almost a mania", and the c rowd
around joined in tie- glad demonstrati >n of
victory at last. Hats were thrown in the
air, handkerchief's waved, and enthusiasm
scarcely ever felt before pervaded the im
mense multitude there congregated. A
band of music appeared amidst the excite
ment, followed by more than a regiment of
citizens, who gave cheer after cheer for the
“white” ticket and the success of the
Democratic party. The State returns,
showing, with few exceptions, great Dem
ocratic gains, were read and received with
tumultuous applause. The crowd wa- al
most mad with joy, and cominued in de
monstrations of delight until a very late
hour. Several ward organizations, headed
by impromptu bands of music, passed tbe
headquarters and were greeted with great
cheering.
Numerous ward organizations, headed
by bands ot music, tendered voluntary
serenades to this "office,” and to the suc
cessful candidates.
They passed over a number of our
principal thoroughfares, and were received
with every demonstration of joy in every
locality. Ladies waived hankkerebiefs from
their windows in evidence of their delight
at the result. Bonfires, more numerous
since the days of universal peace, illumi
nated our city, and told in unmistakeable
language that, the dark night of defeat had
passed, and the glorious sun of victory for
the right had lighted upon our banners.
About half-past 10 o’clock last night,
llasslur’s Band, followed by a large num
ber of persons, serenaded Judge Sliars
wood, at his residence in Thirteenth street,
below Spruce. The band also serenaded
Colonel Lyle at his residence on Tenth
street, below Pine, but he was not home.
In Columbus, Ohio, also, the excite
ment was iutense. A special to the New
York Herald, dated the Bth, says:
The Democrats entered very earnestly
into tbe conflict with tbe Republicans to
day at the polls. Hardly a Democrat in
the city failed to vote, while many Repub
licans might be accused ofbeing apathetic.
From early morn till sundown all the
polls, with the exception of one or two,
were besieged by those who were either
anxious to vote or to ascertain some idea
of how tbe voting was going on.
Less than an itour after the sun went
down crowds began to collect around
Thurman Hall, the Democratic headquar
ters, to await the anxiously expected re
turns. After the hall had been packed to
its utmost capacity a large assembly still
remained on the street outside, looking
eagerly up at the window, to hoar what
deeds the Democracy had performed in
the State.
The Republicans observed the occasion
very modestly, no crowd being assembled
in front of their headquarters and no de
monstration indulged within; but the
Democrats were tumultuous, and every
announcement of a gain over last year s
vote was received with the wildest ap
plause. Returns from the county of
Franklin were brought in by couriers, and
whenever one appeared with either a
Democratic or Republican gain his presence
was hailed with the wildest delight.
The Washington correspondent of the
New York Herald speculates on the inten
tions of the President, and the scenes in
the city, as follows :
The mostintense excitement has prevail
ed in the city all the evening in relation to
the Pennsylvania election. The newspa
per offices and club rooms have been filled
since eight o’clock with crowds of anxious
inquirers. At the White House the
anxiety to obtain news of the result was
very great. The President has receiv
ed dispatches from Philadelphia every
quarter of an hour while the can
vassing of the votes has been going
on. When it became apparent that the
city had gone against the Radicals by a de
cisive majority, indicating their probable
defeat in the State, much satisfaction was
expressed hy the President and all others.
Mr. Johnson, however, has taken the
matter much more coolly than those about
him. He expresses the belief that the
evident reaction against extreme Radical
ism in Pennsylvania, where it ht£s been the
most rampant and violent and openly
threatened revolution, will have the effect
to check the ultra policy hitherto forced
upon Congress by the crack of the Radical
whip, and will very probably bring about a
settlement of the country. He thinks that
if New York goes against the Radical Re
publican ticket, the tide maybe turned and
the prescntdifficultiesovercome. Heregards
the defeat of the constitutional amend
ment in Ohio, if it should really be lost, as
covering the whole ground of the issue of
negro supremacy, and deciding it against
the Radical programme.
Mr. Seward expressed the opinion to
night that the Republican ticket in New
York would be certainly defeated upon a
close vote in Pennsylvania.
The scenes about the city have been live
ly, but of a novel character. For several
elections past the greatest interest and ex
citement have concentrated about the
headquarters of the Loyal League, and
the Loyal Soldiers’ and Sailors League, on
Ninth street. Preparations were made to
light up these quarters this evening, but.
as soon as these first few reports from
Philadelphia had come in, they were closed
and have since been in darkness, a janitor
being placed there to direct visitors to go
to the Chronicle office, on the opposite
side of the way. There, however, the re
turns came very slowly ; but a crowd was
in the office, though not a la _ ge one. One
excited Republican declared that he hailed
from Philadelphia, but nuiv cursed the city
as a disgrace to the nation. Another said.
“Well, Philadelphia has done it now.
Wait and ~ee what Andy will do, damn
him. ’ ’ The Conservative Army and Navy
Union Headquarters, on Pennsylvania
Avenue, were crowded and the President,
Col. O’Beirne, read the returns to the
crowd as they came in. The reports
of the majorities in Philadelphia and
the gains in the State were hailed
with enthusiastic applause. The
National Intelligencer office was also
crowded, and the people were jubilant and
a little boisterous. A large party went up
to the White House at midnight and
cheered loudly. About deven o'clock an
excitement was created ny a city office
holder rushing in with a dispatch from
Philadelphia announcing that the returns
were false and the city had given two
thousand majority for the Republicans.
This was soon upset by the receipt of a
more authentic dispatch. It is stated that
if 20,000 was sent on Saturday to Philadel
phia hy the Republican committee here.
The Atlanta New Era, Samuel Bard's
paper, has, it is stated, turned Radical. It
has Wen changing its complexion for some
time. *
So says the New Orleans Bee. Os this
we are not surprised ; hut, we are aston-
that this has not long since happen
ed. We have known Bard several years,
during which time he has exhibited a
most Chameleonic nature, with most hog
gish propensities. Having been, in the
space of five years, an inferior touth doe
r. hypocritical parson, jack-leg lawyer,
ulgar politician, and all the while a most
I successful rooter (as the ditches about
1 this place could well testify), it is no won
der that he should join the Radicals, for,
with them he can indulge his propensities
without let or hindrance, upon the prin
! eiple that those of like characters agree
best together. He, no doubt, suits the
Rads, and they are welcome to him.
[Carroll [La. ) lit cord.
Fortunate Men.— By reference to the
telegrams this morning, it will be observed
that certain claims of loyal citizens of
1 Charleston. Atlanta and Mobile, for cotton
I seized by the United States Government,
! have been paid, with the slight deduction
i 0 f 2* per cent. We have been informed that
j the amount of the claims of residents of
1 this city, is about s72,uo<j. and that the
' fortunate claimants here are Messrs.
Joseph Purcell, J. W. Carmalt. P. J.
Coogan, S. G. Courtenay, Patrick Moran,
Joseph Mertens and Conningham.
1 l Charleston Mercury.
The Prospects or Cotton Planting.
The following very truthful picture of
the future prospects before the planters
of the South, is from the National Intel
' ligencer :
Whatever may be the quantity of cot
ton produced this season, it seems certain,
; from ail accounts, that the planters will
receive little remuneration lor it. The
treedmen, by their indisposition for labor,
have discouraged the planters tor future
efforts. Those who paid rent for planta
tions have actually lost money by the
j cotton cultivation. The low price of cotton
iis also discouraging. At Atlanta and
i other points it is selling at fourteen cents,
| or about ten cents in gold, which is rather
j lower than the pri .e obtaine i in specie in
I 1800. Then, it is true, cotton could be
profitably made at seven cents, for all
prices were correspondingly low. The
expense of cultivation is now doubled, and
in another year it is not at all probable
that the freedmen will be induced to labor,
even under the rimuluscf advanced com
pensation. Having control of the Gov
j eminent of the _ cotton States, with the
j support of the Federal army, they will be
| come more thoroughly demoralized and
I indolent than ever. In some of the States
j they will use the power of legislation to I
j tax the land and property holders to the
j extent of confiscation.
The cotton manufacturers, we notice,
are now beginning to complain of the cot
ton tax, which they allege destroys the
cotton trade, and added to the tax on the
product of their mills, will force them out j
of the market entirely, giving the whole ,
field exclusively to British manufacturers, j
At the late meeting in Philadelphia on this '
subject the cotton manufacturers alleged :
that of thtf whole amount of the iaxim- j
posed on cotton of the growth of this j
season, but a small part, though collected, j
would reach the Treasury.
Half of the product, it is asserted, is
consumed by expenses of collection, or in a
less direct way alienated from the Treas-
ury.
Low as is the price of cotton, it may
rule lower. Laborers in India can he ob
tained at a merely nominal cost, and in
any numbers, for the cotton fields, and the
latest intelligence is that the crop there
promises remarkably well.
Our manufacturers and growers of cot
ton will ha driven out of the market at
home and abroad by this foreign competi
tion. There is only one remedy for it—
the abandonment of the entire Radical
policy, financial and political.
New York Democratic Platform.
The Democracy of New Y T ork, in Con
vention assembled at Albany, made the
following declarations:
1. That we pledge ourselves to redeem
New Y'ork from corruption and misrule as
the first great step to the restoration of
the Union and constitutional government.
2. That, regarding the National debt
as a sacred obligation, we demand economy
of administration, honesty in the collec
tion and application of revenues, simplifi
cation of'and equality in taxation, and a
currency for the benefit of the people in
stead of corporations, to the end that the
public faith may be preserved and the
Durden of taxation lessened.
3. That we denounce the effort of the
Radical party to retain the power it has
usurped by establishing negro supremacy
in the South by military force, coupled
with the disfranchisement of the mass of
the white population, as an outrage upon
Democratic priuiples and an attempt to
undermine and destroy the republic, and
that we stigmatize the refusal of that par
ty in this S’ate to submit the question of
negro suffrage to the people as a cowardly
evasion of a paramount issue in the pend
ing struggle.
4. That the revelations of corruption in
the management of the Canals, the con
fessed degradation of the Legislatuie, the
resort to extraordinary commissions to
control municipalities, the demoralization
of the revenue service and the fact that a
party holding power over Congress, the
judiciary, the executive and the army has
failed to bring peace, solidity and credit
to thecountiy, demonstrate its utter in
capability to administer government, and
the necessity of wresting power from such
hands.
5. That while we approve of an Excise
law which shall be applicable to the whole
State and secure public order, we are, as
we have ever been, hostile to legislation
which, under the pretext of moral reform,
invades private rights, subjects citizens to
vexatious searches and seizures, and inter
feres with social and religious customs, and
that the Excise Law passed in April, 1866,
hy the Republican Legislature should be
repealed.
6th. That we rc-affirm the doctrine of
William L. Marcy, in the Kotze case, that
adopted and native citizens are alike en
titled to the protection of the American
flag, and we call upon the Federal Govern
ment to enforce it.
7. That the profound gratitude of the
nation is due to the gallant soldiers and
sailors who won imperishable honor in the
ranks of the army and navy of the Re
public. Impelled by a deep and patriotic
desire to maintain the Union and the laws
they cannot be seduced into sustaining
any policy that proposes to subvert by
military despotism the civil and consti
tutional liberties for the security ’and per
petuation of which they imperilled their
lives.
Government Bonds.— The Secretary
of the Treasury yesterday morning ad
dressed a very important letter to a gentle
man in New York iu relation to our
finances, of which the following is a cor
rect copy:
Treasury Department, )
October 7, 1867. j
Dear Sir: lour favor of the 4th inst.
is received. Too much importance is at
tached to the utterance to which you re
fer. The people of the United States are
all sound upon the question of the preser
vation of the national faith as they were
upon the question of the preservation of
the Union. I consider the faith of the
Government pledged to pay the five
twenty bonds when they are paid in coin.
There need be, I think, no apprehension
that they will be called in at the expira
tion of five (5) years from their respective
dates and paid in United States notes.
The United States notes were issued
under the pressure of a great necessity,
and are, by authority of Congress, being
rapidly withdrawn from circulation. No
more can be issued under existing laws,
nor can I believe that any considerable
number of the members of Congress would
favor an additional issue for any purpose
whatever, much less for the purpose of
paying bonds in violation of the express
understanding under which they were ne
gotiated.
The policy of contracting t he circulation
of United States notes adopted by Con
gress and being steadily pursued by the
iNecretary, should of itself, even if the
honor of the nation were not involved in
the question, satisfy holders that five
twenty bonds will not Le called in and paid
before maturity in a depreciated currency.
Very truly, yours,
H. McCulloch, Secretary.
[communicated. |
Lcspldasa Striata.
Editors of the Chronicle <L- Sentinel:
I perceive, by the letter of Mr. W.
Biewett, of Thomasvilie, to the Macon
Telegraph, a copy of which you kindly
sent to me, that he desires to know if the
new plant, found at his locality and which
he so accurately describes, is the same as
the Lespidasa Striata. Undoubtedly it
is, and, I presume, its rapid andapparentlv
simultaneous dissemination along, perhaps,
all the road sides of the South, was caused,
by the seed pods adhering to the clothes of
the passing troops during the war.
Mr. Biewett will see, from Mr. Ravenel s
letter published as a part of Dr. Berekmans
report in your paper a short time since,
that the new plant is not described in any
botanical work iu this country, and its
classification is due to Professor Gray, of
Harvard University, who found it in his
East India collection and thus discovered
it to he a Japan (clover ?) plant.
Geo. W. Rains.
[communicated.]
Pro Bono Publico.
Our people are not demonstrative. On
the contrary, they are a law-abiding, pains
taking. hard-working communi’v. Hence
any excessive abuse creates a unit.
her two long years or more they have
submitted to the exorbitant demands of
t..° Ga- Light Company of Augusta.
I hey submitted, believing that the evil,
sooner or later, would be remedied, but the
promised improvement grew " gradually’
smalierani beautifully less.”
lor the past lew nights the gas fur
nished by our meoporated company has
been positively insufferable. The sup
porters of the company have a right to
inquire when the evil i- to be stopped?
Are we to be suffocated without warning?
If we cannot be furnished with pure gas,
it is the duty of the Superintendent to
notify the public, and allow us to furnish
other moans of illumination, J usiice.
AUGUSTA, GA., WEDNESDAY MORNING, OCTOBER *23, 1867.
Vrom the Xevj Tori; Tribune, 10M.
RECONSTRUCTION.
Another Letter from the Hon. Herschel
V. Johnson, of Georgia.
To the Editor of the Tribune:
, Sir —Several days’ absence from the
| city, and business engagements, have pre
vented an earlier acknowledgement of
■ your courtesy, in publishing my letter of
1 the 6th ult. I respectfully ask a place iu
: your columns for reply.
It is very desirable that a better under-
I standing between the Northern and
Southern people should be brought about.
This can be done only through the press,
which your liberality, in this instance,
tends to promote. Perhaps each section
misunderstands the other. In the North,
the South is supposed to be contumacious,
and untrue to the Union. In the South,
the North is regarded as untrue to the
Constitution, and determined to impose
on us terms of reconstruction that are de
grading and despotic. It may be that
mutual misconception exists, and, viewing
each other through the media of passion
and prej udic-e, the obstacles to harmonious
and good understanding are greatly magni
fied. If they could, as it were, be brought
face to face, and consider the causes of
agreement and discontent in the spirit of
candor and conciliation, who can say that
some common ground of agreement, satis
factory to both might not be discovered?
It is in this temper I venture agaiu to tres
pass upon your kind indulgence.
The quarrel between the two sections has
been as bitter since the war as the war was
fierce while it raged. Surely this ought
not to be so. The fight having ceased,
the quarrel should cease. The vanquish
ed are entitled to magnanimity and justice,
and the victorious can afford to pracEiee
these noble virtues. That war has decreed
that we shall live together under the same
flag. We are the successors ofa common
political ancestry ; we have a common in
terest in the memory ol our past career ;
we are inevitably linked to a common des
tiny. For whatever shall be the fate of
the South will finally be the fate of the
North. So long as we continue to be one
people, under one Government, its bless
ings or its curses will ultimately be dis
tributed throughout the entire extent of
our territorial limits. The North cannot
permanently enjoy more liberty than the
South, and the misguided policy that shall
oppress us, though it may, for a time,
be unfelt at the North, will finally result
in the overthrow of the Constitution, and
end in despotism. The cancer that ap
pears on the smallest extremity, may con -
fine itself to the point of attack for many
years, but it will vitiate the blood, and at
last produce death. The North, in its
power, may force its policy upon the
desolated, overpowered and almost despair
ing South ; it may dictate to us State
Governments repugnant to the wishes and
sentiments of the great majority of' her
intelligent people; it may enthrone the
negro race in the position of superiority
and dominion over the white, by the power
of the bayonet; it may open the doors of
Federal legislation to members who will
represent ignorance and depravity, and
call this reconstruction ofthe Union. But
I fear it will be merely crusting over the
smothered fires of the volcano. Aggret
sion never relents ; its appetite is never
satiated ; and when it has riveted chains
upon us, and has nothing more to do,
think you it will pause in its march or re
turn to tho track of wisdom, justice and
moderation ? Not unless human nature
is changed; not unless ail history is a fable;
not unless the philosophical relation be
tween cause and effect has ceased. Ag
gression is never at rest until, like Alex
ander, it has accomplished its schemes of
aggrandizement; and then, like Alexander,
it weeps because there is no other field
for conquest. The only safety is in arrest
ing it, if possible, in the beginning.
While I thus characterize the policy of
reconstruction which is being so fiercely
pressed, as aggressive, I shall not assail
the patriotism of its authors. I combat
erroneous measures of bad statesmanship.
I protest against them as oppressive and
unconstitutional, whether so designed or
not. I enter my feeble appeal in behalf of
good government. I plead for constitu
tional rights, for the equality of the States,
for a Union of consent —not of force.
In my letter of the 16th ult., I called the
ten States, under Military Government,
“proscribed States." You take me up on
that. Well, suppose I used the wrong
terms, does-that prove they are not en
titled to self-government? Does it show
they should be put under negro dominion
at the point of tbe bayonet? According
to American ideas of liberty, the right of
self-government is inherent in the people,
and its disregard is tyranny.
But I think I designated them “the ten
proscribed States." In your judgment
they are not “proscribed,” but that their
non-representation in Congress is their own
voluntary act, because “they went out on
their own motion.” It is true they at
tempted to “going out;” but the North
said they they should not, and maintained
their resolve by the sword. Hence these
States were never out of the Union. Con
gress has always so held and so legislated.
The laws of taxation, passed during the
war, are being enforced. The Federal
J udieiary is regularly organized and per
forming its appropriate functions within
these States. They are formally called
upon as States of the Union, to ratify
proposed amendments ofthe Constitution.
There is, I believe, not a single act of
Congress, from the day of Secession down
to the passage of the Military Supplemen
tary Bill, which does not recognize them as
States, in the Union.
In an early stage of the war, Congress,
almost unanimously, adopted the follow
ing resolution:
“ Resolved , That this war is not waged,
on our part, in any spirit of oppression,
nor for any purpose of conquest or subju
gation, nor for the purpose of overthrow
ing or interfering with the rights or estab
lished 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 ; that as
soon as these objects are accomplished the
war ought to cease.”
From all this it appears that the war was
waged to maintain the “supremacy of the
Constitution and to preserve the Union ,
with all the dignity, equality and rights of
the States unimpaired." Hence, viewing
the question from the Northern standpoint,
land surely by that you are willing to be
bound] Congress is estopped from denying
that these States are in the Union. Then,
if States in the Union, they are entitled to
representation in Congress, in obedience
to the Constitution. Being refused this
right, are they not “proscribed?”
Your second comment is upon my use
ofthe terms “Southern people,” and you
say the context shows that I “regard the
whites only as constituting the people.”
On the contrary, you say you “contemplate
the whole people of the South,” white and
black, and “insist that the rights and well
being of them all should be cared for.”
On this point, there is no disagreement
between us. We differ as to the moc e in
which this shall be done. Y'ou saj it must
be done according to tho Congressional
scheme of reconstruction. I object to this
scheme.
I. Because it is unconstitutional, and
admitted to be so by its authors.
11. Because it is in direct conflict with
tbe resolution just above quoted. It pro
ceeds upon the idea that the ten proscribed
States are conquered States; whereas,
that the resolution says the war was not
waged for “conquest or subjugation. It
“overthrows and interferes with the rights
and established institutions of the States;”
whereas, according to that resolution, the
war was prosecuted to maintain these. It
destroys the “dignity, equality, and rights
of the States;” whereas, that resolution
declares that the war was waged to “pre
serve them.”
111. Because, its inevitable effect will
be, if not so intended, to place these States
under the dominion of the negro race; so
that however desirable it is, to have the
“well-being'’ of all the people, white and
black, "cared for,” it will place the white
people at the mercy of the black, who are
being irstructed that the latter have griev
ances to avenge against the former. In
language, you embrace “ the whole peo
ple,” white and black, in the arms of your
tender care ; but iu practice . by enforcing
the Congressional scheme, it seems that
the “well-being of the whites is disre
garded. , ,
IV. Because it is based on the assump
tion that Congress has the power to dictate
to these States that their Constitutions
shall contain certain provisions, looking
exclusively to the enfranchisement ot the
black race, and to exercise a supervision
over the action of the people of tae&e
States when assemL'led in primary con
vention to organize their governments.
V. Because the principle which alone j
could justify such action, by Congress, as
that scheme embodies, ignores the separate '
existence of the States, clothed with the j
inherent right- of self-government, and
converts our Confederate system into a
vast consolidation. It is true, the scheme, I
on its face, gives us the option to accept or j
reject. But we are distinctly informed
that unless we accept it, we may expect
worse terms, coupled with confiscation and
more general disfranchisement.
Your third c< • t. being a personal
animadversion up: i my course, deserves
i a few reflection -. I •ep ,-ar what I said in
j my letter of :h Cl; t! v “I never,
iin my whole li: .a ..tirnent or
did an act of i a riot hostility to the
j Constitution o ’.he i tes or to the
Union of the Site-. f ; • it, accord
ing to my hot f its spirit and
i meaning.” ( v mark that I
; repudiated th i-e Federal
j Constitution, and bloody
war to disrupt I Ms I respect
j fully, but eu. ay. Though,
| believing in t tri, ’.ate to secede,
yet, I opposed ’le ‘ Georgia, to
tin: utmost of ■- au, l voted
j against it, in !e Cos 1 It is trae
that I signed the or after. it was
passed, in co rn . -solution, re
questing tha’ * : z j all the dele
gates. But ~:y v m rs it no ad
ditional vaii : : \? do act of the
Convention lul l .; my. signature
had been n ■ inc it valid, 1
never would llot I signed
it, to give as niuci i power to
the action of ;he c ’ * ribfe, in the
hope that it m . probabili
ty of a war so: Y; far as the
Union was 4! - ,it > 4oue by the
ordinance " " posing that,,
I opposed d.r : •j ost, then,- to
say I “re :> Q^&fimcm?
Nor did I \ ! ]roe Union.
The war, .s defensive.
When sece; i L,i s fixed fact, I
yielded to of my State,
unwise ant - believed it to
be—willing ,*rtunes of her
noble poop , . 1 not felt it to
be my dut else could I
have dont y recognized
authority < orgia to give
fife pro tee t .know that
ther e was le part of the
Governme o to counteract
the secess • ijipt'l ‘ t its authori
ty in thef tsi .. eu:. overthrown?
But when the war of coercion was inaugura
ted by President Lincoln, I sustained as far
as I was able the Southern cause, behoving
it to be right in principle, but wrong in
policy. For I did not wish “to live in a
republic whereof one section is pinned to the
residue by bayonets." How can you, I
respectfully ask, censure me for my course?
About the 10th ol Nov oer, 1860, you
promulgated the following sound senti
ments, which were received with delight
in the South :
“And now, if the cotton States consider
tho value of the Union debatable, wemain
tain their perfect right to discuss it. Nay,
we hold, with Jefferson, to the inalienable
right of communities to alter or abolish
forms of government that have become
oppressive or injurious ; and, if the cotton
States sha'l detide that they can do better
out of the Uiiion than iu it, we insist on
letting them ga in peace. The right to
secede may bearevolutionary one, but it
exists nevertheless; and we do not see how
one party cun have a right to do what
another party has a riuht to prevent. We
must ever resist the asserted right, of any
State to remain in the Union and nullify or
defy tho laws thereof; to withdraw from
the Union is quite another matter. And
whenever a considerable section ot our
Union shall deliberately resolve to go out,
we shall resist all coercive measures de
signed to keep it in. We hope never to
live in a Republic whereof one section is
pinned to the residue by bayonets.”
This language, from a gentleman of
your acknowledged talents and influence,
had a powerful effect upon the people of
Georgia. When I warned them against
the folly and danger of secession, I was
denounced as untrue to my section, I was
cited to your sentiments as thus expressed,
and told that you were sounder than I was
upon the mighty issue which then agitated
the public mind. To the extent of the
influence of such utterances from you (and
it was very wide), tho people of Georgia
were induced to believe there would be no
attempt at coercion, and if there should
be, that you would never give your influ
ence in its favor. Now, I put it to your
candor, if you had been a Georgian, enter
taining the opinions which you and I did
as to tho right of secession and the absence
of any right to coerce a secediqg State—
though deprecating the expediency—
would you not, like me, have linked your
fortunes with the destiny of your State ?
But we both now live “in a Republic
whereof one section is pinned to the
residue by bayonets,” and 1 have lived to
be reproached by you for acting upon
principles which you pr-bmulgated.
In youreiglifh 'comment on my former
letter, touching tbe superior mental ca
pacity and cultivation of the white over
the black race, you say: “No man has a
right to rule another merely because of his
greater mental capacity ormtellectudLculti
vation." Ido not controvert this, as an
abstract proposition. But is nut the con
verse of it entitled to consideration? Are
negroes, because their skins are black and
they ignorant and depraved, entitled to
govern the white race, who arc superior
in "mental capacity or intellectual cultiva
don ?” l T ou must answer in the negative,
according to your own principles. Then,
is it wise to force upon the Southern
people, white and black, the adoption of
State Conslitutions and Governments
which will lead to this result? Such will
be the effect of the Congressional scheme
of reconstruction.
Now, one word upon your proposition as
a practical question. While it may be
true that ihe educated and intelligent have
no abstract right to rule the ignorant and
depraved, in the sense of curtailing the
rights of personal liberty, life, and prop
erty, yet it is equally true that a republican
government cannot exist where the politi
cal power it in the hands of the latter class.
Intelligence and virtue must govern, from
the necessity of the case, ortho Govern
ment must fill, and fail to protect the citi
zens of any i lass. It rests upon no ab
stract or natural right, but upon tho right
of self-preservation, which is as applicable
to communities as it is to individuals.
Our system rests upon tbe maxim that the
people are capable of self-government.
This presupposes intelligence to know how
to govern, and virtue to give that intelli
gence proper direction. It, is the highest
interest of the ignorant that the functions
of government should be wielded by the
intelligent. In popular governments, all
that is valuable to man, socially or indi
vidually, depends upon it. It is no en
slavement of tint ignorant to be under such
guardianship, fit confers no misery upon
tho educated to be thus clothed with the
political power ofthe State. But it con
; serves the liberty, life, and property of all.
Y our tenth comment upon my previous
letter, as to qualified suffrage given to ne
groes in the Northern States, is nothing j
but the correction of an error into which I
fell, upon a point of fact. 1 stand correct
l ed. I said what I believed to be true, at
the time, but I cheerfully recognize your
; better information. But t the correction of j
j fact does not touch the question I present- |
| ed, which was that consistency required ;
I Congress, if they think it so sacred, to en- '
force the principle of universal suffrage in
: the Northern as well as in the Southern
States. But they fail to do it, because I
they dare not attempt it. The bayonet is |
not supreme there as it is here. You j
enumerate the States in which unqualified ’
suffrage obtains, and say it “soon will in
several other States, New York included.” j
But how ? Is it in obedience to Congres- i
sional dictation or by the voluntary act of j
those States ? To this we of tho South i
j have no objection. If the people of those
I States desire it, it is their perfect right to
: confer suffrage upon the colored freemen
in their midst. But as equals in the Union
! (which equality Congress, by its resolution,
declared the war was waged to defend and
maintain) have not these ten proscribed
; States the same right to decide this ques- j
i tion for themselves? How can Congress
consistently leave the policy of. free action j
to the Northern but deny it to the South- !
era States? Do yousuppose the Northern
States you name would ever have thus ex- ,
tended suffrage if by so doing they would
have put themselves under negro dominion?
And if that would be the effect, and Con
gress to attempt to force it upon them,
would thev yield without complaint ? But .
the down-trodden aod overpowered South ;
li s forced to submit, at the point of the I
bayonet, and her honest complaints are
construed mto disloyalty anu rebellion.—-
The Northern States can afford, if they
| choose to enfranchise their colored popula
tion, for they are too few in number to con
stitute a potent element of political power, i
How different is it in the Southern States'? !
In most of them, the colored population !
nredominates ;»and if they did not, the
Congressional scheme disfranchises a suf
ficient number of the whites to doom them ;
to a helpless minority and negro domina
tion. , , ~ . .
To appreciate properly the situation,
we should look back to the even-s tnat
have transpired. After maintaining the
struggle for four years of bloody conflict, !
the "Confederate forces surrendered their
arms upon the simple condition that they j
would return to the pursuits of peace, and
obey the Constitution and laws of the
United States. They did so, in good faith,
and from the policy which Congress had
avowed, in the resolution above quoted, ;
as to their object in prosecuting the war;
the people of these States never dreamed j
that they were to be treated as subjugated
—that their S'ate governments were to be ,
ignored or superseded —that their ‘ 'dignity,
equality, and rights,” as States ot the
Union, were to be denied them; but, on
the contrary, had every reason to believe
they would be permitted to resume their
constitutional relations to the Union, and
to be represented in the Federal Congress.
But the President of the United States
issued his proclamation, setting forth terms
on which they might do so, which terms
were the abandonment of secession, the
repudiation of their war debt, the repeal
of all luws and ordinances in conflict with
the Constitution arid laws of the United
States, the ratification of the amendment
of the Constitution abolishing slavery, and
the adoption ofa like amendment of their
State Constitutions. They did so, in good
faith, and therefore expected restoration.
They regarded the President as the repre
sentative of the sentiments and policy of
the North, and entertained no doubt that
Congress would cheerfully accede to what
had been done, and thus give harmony to
the distracted country. Up to that time,
there had been no breach between the
President and Congress and the great Re
publican party. No authoritative intima-
tion had been given that other terms
woul'Jt be exacted, and it remains for his
tory to record the disappointment, cha
g&rin, and mortification of the Southern
States when they ascertained that
their hopes and expectations were
doomed to defeat. But the Congress and
President got into a quarrel, 'and Congress
visited upon us their wrath, as if we were
responsible for the breach. Restoration
has been postponed ; and, up to this day,
Congress stands unpledged to our admis
sion without qualification, even if we adopt
the Sherman scheme of reconstruction. It
is not offered to us as an unconditional
finality ; prominent Republican members
say it is not a finality, unless the action of
these States shall exhibit satisfactory Re
publican majorities. Aside, therefore,
from the objectionable features of the
scheme itself, do you wonder that the
Southern States hesitate ? Can you be
surprised at their earnest and decided
opposition to the scheme '? When Con
gress repudiated the Executive plan of re
construction, it was their duty to propose
oneof their own promptly, cordially, and
in good faith. If they had offered such a
plan—constitutional and just ip its terms —
with the assurance that it was a finality, it
would have been accepted. But they
wrangled for nearly or quite two years—
threatening impeachment of tho President
aod confiscation ; and at last concocted
the programme now on trial—degrading,
as we think, to the manhood of our people,
unconstitutional in every feature, and
evincive of deep hatred toward us, on the
part ofa majority of the Republican party.
The programme will be executed even
beyond the exactness of its letter and the
vengeance of its spirit. How sad, that
the victors refuse ue just and magnani
mous in the hour of triumphant success !
That, so far from listening, they become
enraged, at our earnest protest—nor hoar
argument, nor give us utterance, even
through their presses (except the Tribune)
—much less in Congress ! How lamenta
ble that, in a time of peace, habeas corpus
is suspended, and the civil courts pro
hibited from hearing our complaints—that
an unarmed people are kept under the
surveillance of military garrisons, at the
cost of millions to the public treasury I
How exceedingly mortifying that, when
we plead for the benefits of our common
Constitution, we are branded with dis
loyalty and gravely told that we are with
out the pale of the Constitution ! Oh 1
there will come a day of retribution ! It
may be that, we of the South, in the eye
of the just God of nations, are unworthy
to be rescued from the fate which casts its
ominous shadows before us. But let the
words of Him, “who spake as never man
spake,” read all a lesson. “Those on
whom the tower of Siloam fell, think ye
they were sinners above all other men ? I
tell you, nay.” We have been crushed by
the fall, but we are “not sinners above all
other men.” «
Permit me to reason with your readers
a little concerning the grounds on which
Congress justifies its harsh policy toward
the Southern States. It is asserted by its
leading and most distinguished advocate
that the condition of these States presents
a case outside ofthe Constitution—one for
which it does not provide. That proposi
tion, if' the States were not States in the
Union, and had gotten out, as the legiti
mate result of the war, would be plausible.
But they did not get out of the Union.
They were held in, by force of arms, and
Congress, as I have above shown, waged
the war, not for subjugation or conquest,
“or overthrowing or interfering with the
rights or established institutions of the
States,” * * “but to preservo the
Union, with all tho dignity, equality, and
rights of tho several States unimpaired.”
Did Congress fail or succeed in the object
for which it prosecuted the war? Did it
preserve the Union? If it did, then it
also preserved the States—these ten pro
scribed States—with “all their dignity,
equality, and rights unimpaired.” How
is it possible, then, for their condition to be
such as to place them beyond the benefits
ofthe Constitution?
But suppose them to be outside of the
Constitution, whence does Congress derive
tho power to reconstruct them at all?
Cougress has no power not conferred by
tbe Constitution. It has no inherent
powers ; it can exercise none but such as
arc delegated to it by the several States
that formed the Constitution.
It is true, the Constitution does not
provide for secession, for no government
provides for its own disintegration. Tho
right of secession is not to bo found in the
Constitution, but it results from the very
nature ofthe compact between the States.
I cannot put it better than you did, in
your language previously quoted : “The
right to secede may be a revolutionary one,
but it exists nevertheless." The Constitu
tion, not having provided for secession,
did not provide for coercion ; and I cannot
put this proposion in any better language
than you did, in the same extract; “We
do not see how one party has a right to do
what another party has a right to prevent.
We must ever resist the asserted right of
any State to remain in the Union and
nullify or defy the laws thereof. To with
draw from the Union is quite another mat
ter." Therefore, you being judge, the
right of secession exists ; and, yourself be
ing judge, Jim right of coercion does not
exist. Hence the war waged by the Fed
eral Government was unauthorized. No
wonder, then, that the present condition
of these States is anomalous. They are
coerced States —“pinned to the residue by
bayonets” unconstitutionally employed.
Hence, they arc reduced to their present
anomalous condition by the wrongful ac
tion of the Federal Government. But
| does that justify < '■ tigress in doing any
and everything to and with the overpow
] ered States which passion may debate ?
| Does one wrong justify another? or do
two wrongs make a right ?
But I will concede, for the sake ofj
' argument, that secession was wrong upon ;
| principle, and that Congress had the right '
to resort to coercive measures to preserve j
the Union. Having done so successfully,
! is Congress justifiable in resorting to an
! unconstitutional mode of reconstruction?
| Will you say, that, being a case not pro
| vided for by the Constitution —no mode
of reconstruction prescribed in that in
strument —Congress is the sole judge of
what the exigency requires ? Surely a
position so illogical will not be assumed. :
i if Congress could find no mode of recon
‘ struction in the Constitution, it proves,
what is true, that no reconstruction was
necessary ; that the moment these States
laid down their arms and renewed their
allegiance to the Constitution, ipso facto ,
they were entitled to a renewal of their
practical relations to the Union. If Con- j
i gress had recognized this irresistible i
logical conclusion, there would have been j
no further difficulty about restoration.
Where Congress finds no authority ex- !
pressed or necessarily implied in the Con
stitution, it has no power to move a finger.
It is the creature and not the master of
the States. The Constitution is its letter
of attorney, outside of which it cannot act.
Hence, though it should be true that by
their attempt at secession, and failure,
these States placed themselves outside of
the Constitution (which is a very absurd
proposition), Congressia not outside of the
Constitution) They are bound by _ it, and j
they cannot legislate upon any subject, for
any purpose, in any way, not sanctioned i
by it. They are sworn to support and obey ;
it; and if' they were to attempt the folly of;
legislating for the inhabitants of the Moon, j
they would be bound to conform to that j
instrument of fundamental and paramount j
law. If we may not claim its benefits, i
they cannot, without moral guilt, knowing- i
ly violate its provisions. It is a law to ;
them as stern and exacting as tbedecalogue.
It is argued by many that the effect of
the attempt to secede was extinction of ;
the several governments of the seceding j
States—a sort of political suicide; and
that the defeat of it by the Federal Govern
ment merely preserved the territorial in-1
tegrity of the United States, without vivi
fying them. To my mind, this is a most
absurd proposition. The States of this
Union, by virtueof the sovereignty ot their
people, are self-constituted political organi
zations. They derived their existence from
no higher power than themselves. They
are unlike corporations which are created
by the supreme power, and may, in various
ways, forfeit their franchises. In other
words, they are incapable of political sui
cide—incapable of forfeiting their rights of
self-government. The people may volun
tarily change the form of their organiza
tion. They might disband it altogether.
But does even such a radical change as this
deprive the people of the sovereign right
to reorganize in their own way ? Does it
confer authority upon any other power
under the sun to take them in hand and
force anew government upon them with
out their consent ? I challenge the pro
duction of a single respectable authority,
ancient or modern, who has ever written
upon political or international law, in sup
port of such a doctrine. But admit, for
the sake of argument, that these States, by
secession, did commit an act of forfeiture;
to whom did they forfeit? To whom did
their right of_ self-government secure or
revert? Will it be pretended that it was
to the remaining States, or the Federal
Government ? What is the Government
of the United States? Is it not the crea
ture of the States ? Was not its organi
zation subsequent to that of the several
original States ? Is it not a Government
of limited powers, defined in the Constitu
tion ? How, then, could it succeed to the
rights of the several seceding States?
Who ever heard of the creator forfeiting to
the creature, or the principal to his agent ?
Where is the word or letter in the Consti
tution that even remotely squints at such a
doctrine ? Or suppose it were in the Con
stitution, would it not be incumbent on
Congress, in reconstructing thebe States,
to proceed according to the Constitution,
and on the groat principles which underlie
the frame work of our political system?
Would they not be bound to preserve the
privilege of the writ of habeas corpus, tho
right of trial by jury, and recognize the
sacreduess ol property, nte, and liberty ?
Can they substitute for these militari 4*su
premacy ? Dare they ignore the sovereign
ty of the people of these States, and the
fundamental idea that all governments
derive their just powers from the conseut
of the governed ? Do you find any author
ity in the Constitution for placing these
States under military governors, ana adopt
ing such machinery for reorganization as
subordinates the intelligent and virtuous
to the ignorant and depraved? As well
place the dominion over eight millions of
white people in the hands of four millions
of negroes?
But this theory of State suicide or for
feiture is as false in fact as it is in prin
ciple. These States never did disintegrate
nor disband their organization. They
maintained governments—the same that
existed at the time of Secession—in full
and vigorous operation. The close of the
war found them so. They complied with
all that the Exeeutiveof the United States
required, and sought earnestly to return
to their former position in the Union, but
were rejected, with bitter abuse and and
- heaped upon their people as
bands of rebels and traitors.
Beside, how could they commit suicide
when Congress resolved they should not,
and waged war for four years, according to
resolution previously quoted, to prevent it
—“with no purpose of conquest or subju
gation, nor of overthrowing or interfering
with the rights and established institutions
of the States?”—but to maintain them
“with all their dignity, equality, and
rights unimpaired ?” Though States may
not commit suicide or forfeiture of sover
eignty to the Federal Government they
may be subjugated and overthrown by
tyranny and despotism; and it is in this
way only that the States of the American
Union can be destroyed.
Those, however, who do not maintain
this theory, insist that these States have
been engaged in a wicked rebellion, the
suppression of which cost tho Federal
Government thousands of millions of treas
ure and hundreds of lives. The assertion
of the cost is true; and, whether properly
styled a rebellion or not, the remembrance
of the war must bring a pang of sadness to
every feeling heart. But we too have to
mourn over our impoverishment, as a peo
ple, the graves of our gallant dead and the
woes of widowhood and orphanage which
have cast their shadows into many once
happy homes. After a struggle so un
natural and so grievous between this great
family of Washington’s children, in which
botli sides exhibited heroism, courage and
endurance that must challenge mutual re
spect, these common sorrows ought to melt
the hearts of both sections into forgiveness
ofthe past; the waters of Lethe should
wash out the memory of our sufferings and
we should come together in the spirit of
magnanimity and justice—the only foun
dation on which permanent peace and
prosperity can be restored ! But we, the
powerless and unarmed vanquished, must
be punished by the triumphant victors!
But can you punish States ? Publicists,
who treat of war powers while war rages,
maintain the right of one side to punish
the other. But 1 challenge the production
of a single respectable authority to justify
the punishment of the vanquished, in their
character as States, after they have laid
down their arms. At the time of surrender,
the victorious party may dictate the terms
of surrender. But it can never, thereafter,
superadd others, by way of punishment, or
for any purpose. Such an attempt is treach
erous and despicable, and is so considered
by all civilized nations. Whenco, then,
does Congress derive tbe authority to pun
ish these States, as States ? Point, if'you
can, to a single word of the Constitution
to justify it. If individuals have commit
ted treason, you may punish them, and it
indicates the mode in which it shall be
done. It must be done by tho judicial
tribunals, after a public trial and convic
tion by an impartial jury. But it is add
ing cruelty to injustice to punish the whole
peoples of States by abrogating their gov
ernments and imposing upon them gov
ernments against their consent, thus in
volving the innocent with the guility, in
the odium of the alleged crime. And do
you not know, there were thousands in all
these States, that deprecated and deplor
ed secession ? and who took shelter under
the Confederate flag, because there was no
power here, for months after secession—ay
foryears-to pro’ect them under the “Stars
and Stripes?” Such treatment derives no
support from international law or the
Constitution. Christianity and the civili
zation of tho nineteenth century revolt at ]
such a wholesale system of primitive re- j
tribution. Impartial history will brand i
it; the enlightened world will condemn i
it. The triumphant North ought not to !
persist in it. It is due to themselves and j
to the character of our Government to j
abandon it. True statesmanship acts j
cautiously, justly, upon principles, with- |
out the influence of vindictive temper. j
In your eleventii comment upon my ;
’letter, you say: “There are many good j
men at the South, some of whom were I
Rebels; but public tranquility and public )
justice can bo secure only when guaranteed
by equal rights and equal laws. * * *
Yet they must be guaranteed, nay, will be;
and then capital, energy, enterprise, and
I prosperity, will abundantly bies3 the
; South.” This J understand to be an an
j nouncement, quasi authoritative, that the
! Cougressional scheme of reconstruction
will be carried out at all hazards, which
signifies that the negroes shall be univer
sally enfranchised, as the means of “guar
anteeing equal rights and equal laws,” and
that then the reign of prosperity will j
begin at the South. Do you vainly expect j
that the white people of the South will
! have “equal rights and equal laws” when
| subordinated to the dominion of the black
race? Does it look like “guaranteeing
equal rights and equal laws” to disfran
chise a sufficient number of whites to
secure this result? I agree with you that
the scheme will be executed, and I pray
that your promised good timr;3 for tho
South may be fulfilled. But I do not
expect it, for the simple reason that the
| legitimate and necessary results of the
i programme in turning over these States to
: negro rule will defeat “equal rights and
! equal laws” forever.
In the same comment you say, “and
I these (equal rights and equal laws) Mr.
| Johnson s party, when restored to power,
j by President Johnson, refused to gurantee
|or enact. ’ To this I simply reply, that
we did all that the President required, and
by our legislation, enacted the principles
; ofthe Civil Rights Bill passed by Congress.
! We made all men, black and white, equal
j before the civil law. We did not confer
j political rights upon the negro ; first, be
cause the victorious power represented by
I Gen. Grant, at the time of surrender, did
| not demand it; and secondly, because we
i did not believe, as we do not now believe,
I that it is compatible with good govern
ment. The President and the Republican 1
j party, not having at that time quarreled, j
j we were not advised that the latter would !
j demand more at our hands. We had i
■ every reason to believe that he not only
represented the Government ofthe United
States, but also the policy ofthe dominant |
power. Still, however, if that party, in i
a spirit of candor, magnanimity, and .
justice, had offered a reasonable programme
of reconstruction —one that was consistent
with the avowed objects of the war, as
expressed, in the Congressional resolutions, \
previously quoted —as a finality , it would j
have been accepted. The occasion, as well j
as wise statesmanship, ought to have
suggested to the Republican party the
policy of the utmost frankness and ex
plicitness of detail, coupled with the in- 1
dieation of a sincere desire not only to 1
restore these States on a Constitutional j
basis, but, also, of good feeling and con- 1
NEW SERIES VOL. XXVI. NO. 42.
tidence. Suppose that Congress, as it could
or would not admitour Senators andßepre
seritatives, had invited friendly conference
with the Southern States, through their
intelligent and representative men; sup
pose, in such conference, they had said,
gentlemen, we find ourselves in an anoma
lous condition—one not provided for by the
Constitution; you are overpowered and at our
mercy, but we do not wish to deal harshly;
with you; four millions slaves have been
emancipated by the war; their rights and
welfare must be eared for, in any scheme of
reconstruction which we may adopt; it is a
question deeply affecting your political and
social structure, and therefore we desire
your views and your co-operation iu de
vising some scheme, just to both races and
promotive of-goo and government. Can you
doubt that such a conference would have
resulted in some plan which would have
harmonized the country and given
ample protection to the black people ?
Knowing the then temper of the Southern
mind, I am suro such a course would have
been most beneficial, and that, to-day, in
stead of quarreling over the negro, we
should have been united and cultivating a
good understanding between the Nori h
and the South. But this would not do. It
was undignified for the victors to hold
parley with the vanquished; we were
deemed vile Rebels and traitors, and to he
treated as a despised set of outlaws. It
mattered not whether eight millions of
white people were pleased or not, if, by
force, foul millions of negroes be put over
them. We have the. power, and the rebels
shall feel it. llow sad is the temper of the
times! _ No effort at conciliation when the
well-being of the whole country demands
it l The Republican party may have
thought, and doubtlass did think, we did
not deserve it. Beit so, if you will it; but
do not the higher interests of all, and the
loftier claims of statesmanship, plead for
it? YYas it not, and is it not now, requir
ed by the very genius and spirit of out
form of Government?
But the negroes have been emancipated
from slavery. The Congress has con
ferred upon them State citizenship, with
out the shadow ofa shade of Constitutional
authority, and insists that they shall be
universally enfranchised, upon the as
sumption that they will not be represented
without it—an assumption not sustained
by the theory, history, or practice of our
Government. Our system has never con
templated, nor does it recognize the prin
ciple of class representation. Its repre
sentative feature looks to communities,
and as communities are composed of all
their classes, orders, and occupations, each
is represented when the whole is. Or
ganized as our system is, class representa
tion is impracticable. Our mechanics,
manufacturers, corporations, foreign-born
citizens, are not represented as classes,
but, each being integral parts of the whole,
they are represented by the representatives
of the community, be it towns, counties,
or States, each in its place, being sub
ordidate to the whole. According to this
theory (and right or wrong, it is our
theory, and lies at the foundation of its
fundamental law), there is no reason or
principle that the colored race should be
represented, much less that these States
should now be reorganized upon a plan
which will give them, as a class, the su
premacy of political power. But the Re
publican party have resolved that this
shall be so, whether just or unjust, wise or
unwise. It being their fixed purpose, not
to be thwarted by any means of which I
can conceive, that the black people shall
be enfranchised, it would be well to in
quire, ifthere be no plan by which they
may exercise the right of ballot, and be
thus represented, without jeorpadizing the
interests and rights of the white race.
Although I believe it would be better
for the negroes themselves and for the
Republic that they go forever unrepre
sented, rather than turn over the Southern
States to their dominion, under the Con
gressional scheme, yet I am not insensible
to the force of the proposition, that four
millions of free people ought, if possibly
compatible with good government and the
safety ofthe white people, to have a voice
in the legislation of the country. Nor do
I believe there is an intelligent white man
in these States who would not readily
award to them representation upon such a
plan. \V hat we wish is good government ;
we do not wish them to be serfs because
they are black. At the same time, we are
unalterably opposed to surrendering to
them the political power of the Southern
States without some sufficient check ; in
side of the organization, upon their folly,
or their ignorance, or their cupidity, or
their vengeance. It is cruel, in the North,
to insist upon a contrary policy, such as
that embodied in tbe Congressional plan
of Reconstruction. They ought to unite
with us, since they are determined upon
their enfranchisement, in devising some
scheme that will be, at least, safe for the
protection of all. This is the grand desid
eratum ; for if the political organism fur
nish the minority with no means of peace
able redress, within itself against oppres
sion by the majority, they will ultimately
resist it by force. This will inaugurate
conflicts between the two races and produce
the most horrid scones of bloodshed. Can
it be done ? I should have strong hope of
success if the dominant power would pause
and grapple with the subject as statesmen
determined to preserve Constitutional
liberty. It can be doue in but one way,
so far as I can see, and that is, the plan
advanced by Mr. Calhoun in his admirable
“Disquisition on Government.” After
showing that the mere right of suffrage,
without some other provision to counteract
the tendency of Government to oppression
and abuse of power, by tho numerical ma
jority, will not suffice, he says:
“That this provision [i. e., the provis
ion necessary to counteract such tendency]
must be of a character calculated to prevent
any one interest, or combination of inter
ests, from using the powers of government
to aggrandize itself at the expense of
others. Here lies the evil; and just in
proportion as it shall prevent or fail to
prevent it, in the same degree it will effect
or fail to effect the end intended to be ac
complished. There is but one certain
j mode in which tb ; s result can be secured ;
and that is, by theadoption of some restric
tion or limitation which shall so effectually
prevent any one interest, or combination
of'interests, from obtaining the exclusive
control of' the Government as to render
hopeless all attempts directed to that end.
There is, again, but one mode in which
this can be effected ; and that is, by taking
tho sense of each interest or portion ofthe
community which may be unequally and
injuriously affected by the action of the
Government, separately, though its own
majority, or in some other way by which
the voice may be fairly expressed ; and to
require the consent of each interest, either
to put or keep the Government in action.
This, too, can be accomplished only in one
way, and that is, by such an organism of
the Government; and, if necessary for the
purpose, of the community also ; as will,
by dividing and distributing the honors of
government, give to each division or in
terest, through its appropriate organ,
either a concurrent vfioe in making and
executing the laws, or a veto on their exe
cution. It is only by such an organism
that the assent of each can be made ne
cessary to put the Government in motion ;
or the power made effectual to arrest its
action when put in motion ; and it is only
by the one or other that the different in
terests, orders, classes, or portions, into
which the community may be divided, can
be protected, and all oonflict and struggle
between them prevented, by rendering it
impossible to put or keep it in action with
out the concurrent consent of all.
“Such an organism as this, combined
, j with the right of suffrage, constitutes, in
: fact, the elements of Constitutional Gov
ernment. “The one, by rendering those
ii who make and execute the laws responsi
. i ble to thoseon whom they operate, prevents
; the rulers from oppressing the ruled ; and
I the other, by making it impossible for any
I one interest or combination of interests, or
j class, or order, or portion of the commu-
I nity, to obtain exclusive control, prevents
j any one from oppressing the other. It is
clear that oppression and abuse of power
j must come, if it all, from the one or the
I other quarter. From no other can they
j come. It follows that the two, suffrage
and proper organism combined, are suffi
j cient to counteract the tendency of Gov
; emment to oppression and abuse of power;
I and to restrict it to the fulfillment of the
' great ends for which it is ordained.”
This is a naked statement of Mr. Cal
i houn's doctrine of the “concurrent ma
i jority.” It may be difficult of application,
j but it is nevertheless sound in philosophy.
! The present condition of the country is
! a practical and most forcible illustration of
what Mr. Calhoun so lucidly demonstrates,
I the tendency of popular government to
: oppression and abuse of power. In its
I organization, the framers of our Govern
ment relied mainly upon suffrage as the
means of counteracting this tendency. But
experience has shown that all checks have
been absorbed or ignored in the unrestrict
ed triumph of the numerical majority. Its
will is substituted for the Constitution, and
both the Executive and Judiciary depart
ments are at its mercy. It rules supreme
over the Union ; it controls absolutely a
majority ofthe Northern States, and seems
determined, through the instrumentality
of the plan of reconstruction, to enthrone i
itself permanently over the Southern 1
States. Now what mode of redress is left -
to the minority if they deem themselves
oppressed ? Can they resort to nullifica
tion ? That is absurd, under our system.
Can they resort to secession? That has
been tried and it has failed. The right
has been successfully denied by the arbit
rament of arms. The Executive arm is
paralyzed. He can do nothing to protect
a helpless minority. It is now settled, so
far as a precedent can do so, that Congress
can strip him of the functions confided to
him by the Constitution. The Judiciary
can bring no relief, for the Supreme
Court refuses to take cognizance of politi
cal questions. It is clear, therefore, that
the will of the majority is substituted for
the Constitution ; that the minority have
left to them no peaceable way of resisting
oppression and abuse of power; and that
Constitutional Government is practically
at an end. Its form remains, but the
spirit has fled, and like a lifeless corpse it
must soon go into decomposition, unless
the normal tendencies of existing causes
can be counteracted. The doctrine of Mr.
Calhoun, if it should be considered too
difficult of application, might prove sug-'
gestive of a wise solution of our difficulties,
if statesmen and patriots would lift them
selves up to the occasion. Two points
must be attained in order to save Consti
tutional liberty. First, the governments of
the ten proscribed States—indeed, ot all
the late slaveholding States—should be so
organized as to secure the political power
to the intelligent portion ot their people.
This is predicated upon the idea that ne
gro suffrage is a fixed fact. The repre
sentative principle should be so modified
and interwoven into the Constitutions to
be formed as to allow negro suffrage, on
the one hand, and on the other to protect
not only the whites, but all classes and in
terests against their ignorance, or
vengeance, or cupidity. Secondly, the
Federal Constitution should be so amend
ed as to afford to the minority a peaceable
mode of resisting or arresting effectually
the tyranny and usurpations of the major-
ity within the organism. In this way only
can constitutional government be restored
and its confederate feature preserved. It
is practicable if the temper of the public
mind were favorable. Is not the effort
worthy of being made? Why should not
the dominant power of the North pause,
ere it be too late, and take hold of the sub
ject in the spirit of patriotism, and with
the elevated purpose of statesmanship ?
They will find earnest and sincere co
laborers in the South—men who desire
nothing but good government, and who,
to secure it, are willing to sacrifice all per
sonal ambition. The people of the South
are ripe for such amendments to their
State and Federal Constitutions as will
result in safety to all classes. It will soon
she too late—it is, I fear, now too late—for
these or any other suggestions, even if
they came from a source more worthy of
consideration than I am, to arrest the at
tention of the North. We are rushing on
with a terrible momentum to consumma
tion. In a few more weeks, or months,
the Congressional scheme, fatal, harsh, and
oppressive as it is, will have been executed
in the ten proscribed States. We Jnow
how hard it will be to correct the errors that
will havebeencrytaliizediuto Constitutional
forms, llow easy the innovation ? How
difficult is reform ? But I expect no
change in our downward course; for the
majority, clothed with power and resolved
to keep it, are not likely to adopt any lino
of action calculated to curtail or restrain it.
We must go on to the end and abide, what
I regard as inevitable, the negroizing of
the Southern States, and the final over
throw of Constitutional liberty.
For this, the Union was never formed ;
the late war was not fought by the Federal
armies ; such was not our understanding
when the Confederate flag was furled in
sadness and is now "'theconquered banner.”
What I have written is dictated by no
spirit of discord, no hostility to recon
struction on correct principle, nor desire to
irritate the inflamed feelings of the peo
ple, North and South. I earnestly desire
tranquility, the return of prosperity, the
harmony of the States, the integrity of the
Union restored, and the highest happiness
of all the people, of all the sections of this
vast country. Cliido me with disloyalty if
you will ; brand me as a traitor, if you
please. I hurl back no epithets of retalia
tion ; my devotion to the Constitution is
my defence, and the consciousness of
patriotic purpose, my consolation.
Very respectfully,
Your obedient servant,
Hersciiel V. Johnson.
Augusta, Ga., Sept. 0,1807.
Letter from Mclican.
McBEAN, atOBMCmuCQ.. ■ Oct. Ibr
Editors Chronicle <fe SenttimT ~ **“ ''
Gents —Cotton picking is progressing
slowly, not because there is nt> cotton to
pick but because a majority of the planta
tion hands are down with chills and fever,
and the disease instead of decreasing seems
to be on the increase, and we can hardly
expect an abatement before Jack Frost
spreads his white mantle over our land.
A heavy storm of wind and rain would
destroy thousands of bales of cotton in this
and Burke county, for it is impossible to
find hands to take the place of sick ones,
although planters cheerfully offer from
fifty to sixty ceDts per hundred for picking.
It seems that there must, necessarily,
always be some drawback in gathering the
cotton crop; then, again the present prices
arc enough to discourage the most suc
cessful planter. It is well known to every
experienced cotton planter that, under
the present system of labor, cotton cannot
be raised at present prices, and the plant
ers generally will be in no better circum
stances, pecuniarilyspeaking, the coming
year than they were atthe beginning of this,
and the result will be that their attention
will have to be turned to raising something
besides cotton. I will send to your o%e
to-morrow a few stalks of sugar cane
grown by Allen Chavons, Esq., of this
county. It is not as large in circumference
as some 1 have seen, but the hoighth, I
think, will cqjmare with any raised on the
uplands.
The break where the late accident oc
curred on the Augusta & Savannah Rail
road has jbeen thoroughly repaired, in a
strong and substantial manner, under the
supervision of Mr. Win. B. Chavons, in
charge of bridge gang for this road.
Hoping that the fever will decrease in
ourmidst, and thatquinine will remain at
statu quo prices, I remain, yrs truly,
General Grant.—A dispatch, says
thatata meeting in Galena, Illinois, on the
sth instant, Congressman E. B. Wash
burn undertook to define General Grant’s
position in detail. As Mr. Washburn is
an intimate friend of the General’s, con
siderable interest is attached to the state
ments made, which are, in effect, that
General Grant’s sympathies are with
Congress in its reconstruction measures,
and that he had advised an extra session,
and had used his influence with Senators to
accept the clause in the House bill re
quiring the assent of the Senate to the
removal of District Commanders. Favor
ing the reconstruction acts, every effort of
his had been directed to the enforcement
of the laws in their letter and spirit, and
he had accepted the position of Secretary
of War from a stern sense of duty to the
country, and to prevent its being filled by
a Johnson man. Mr. W. also stated that
his acceptance of the position was with the
knowledge .and consent of Mr. Stanton,
after a full consultation and understand
ing between them. In regard to the
General being a candidate for the Presi
dency, Mr. W. stated that he had no right
to speak.
i Suffrage.—The Earl of Shaftesbury,
- in a speech lately delivered in the house of
i Lords of England, gave utterance to this
sentiment. “The gift of suffrage is the
i most fatal gift ever bestowed upon an un
educated people.’’
The expression, though short, comprises,
says the Columbus Sun, a library of wis
dom which it would be well that our rulers
could in time understand and appreciate
Upon the wise and unjust use or the igl
norantarid corrupt abuse of the “gift”
must depend the glory and happiness or
the ignominy and misery of a representa
tive government and people. Like every
blessing, it is fraught with untold good or
evil. It is the poison or life blood of our
political system, coursing through the
veins and giving health and strength or
disease and death. It is the pilot who
stands by the wheel and directs the na
tional vessel as well beneath a cloudless
sky as when the night gathers in amid the
angry billows and the ru-h of'the tempest.
An element of such power should be
safely controlled and wisely and honestly
directed, To bestow the trust without
education, is like committing your life to
a mad engineer, or giving as a toy a rat
tlesnake to a child. Self-preservation de
mands that this privilege should be grant
ed with caution, and should be exercised
only with a deep responsibility of its efforts.
Mr. T. E. Lloyd, of Washington, D. C.,
has in his possession a Masonic jewel,
which ho received from a Union soldier. It
is of gold, and is inscribed, “Chas. Oberm
cier, Eufaula Chapter, No. 24, Eufaula,
Ala., 1862.” Its owner, doubtless, fell in
battle, and it came into possession of one
of the United States soldiers. Mr. Lloyd
has written to the Chapter for
.n regard to its owner.