* * * * *
The great question of the hour is, that of rebuilding the edifice of the
Republic, which has been rudely shaken and partly thrown down by the
rebellion. All patriotic hearts, in anticipation of the speedy close of
the war, are turned with intense interest to this important work.
Opinions divide upon this as upon all other great subjects, and we have
two antagonistic ideas, organizing their respective parties with
reference to it. One party maintains that the rebellious States have
forfeited all their rights, and can under no circumstances claim to be
recognized in their former relations, except on a re-admission into the
Union upon the terms prescribed by the Constitution for the admission of
new States. The other party denies that any of the States, as such, have
forfeited, or can forfeit any of their rights, and maintains the duty of
the Federal Government to protect all the States in their constitutional
integrity, to put down the rebellion within them, and to restore to them
the republican forms which have been violently overthrown.
In each of these positions, there seems to be a combination of truth and
error. So long as any State is in a belligerent and treasonable
attitude, disclaiming and repudiating her obligations under the
Constitution, she is obviously not entitled to the benefits of the
system which she thus assails and defies. The State being sustained in
rebellion by its whole people, it is vain to say the Government can only
regard the people as individuals, for these are the State, and must be
treated accordingly. But if, laying down her arms, or even after being
conquered, a State returns to her allegiance, to reject her demands
would be to admit that secession had been effectual. It would be a
recognition of the validity, if not of the rightfulness of the movement
which assumed to carry the State out of the Union.
On the other hand, to maintain that the State is still legally in the
Union, even at the moment of violent treason, and is still entitled to
claim her position and rights as such, would be equally, if not more
absurd and injurious to the nation. It is argued, that if there be any
true and loyal citizens in the State, however few, they are entitled to
the protection of the Federal Government, and the recognition of their
State as a member of the Union. This doctrine is unreasonable and
impracticable. Any theory which would carry us to the absurd extreme of
constituting a State of an inconsiderable number of men,--the paltry
minority of a large population--would not be more objectionable to the
good sense of the people, than irreconcilable with the fundamental
principles of our complex government. Such a minority, however small,
would be entitled to the protection and to the highest favor of the
Government; and if they could be built up into a power sufficiently
strong to maintain themselves in the State, then they would fairly be
entitled to claim full recognition. If, by the legitimate exercise of
its war powers, by the just restraint and punishment of treason, the
Federal Government can establish the real political ascendency of the
loyal part of the population, and thus actually restore the State
Government on a fair and substantial basis, even though it be placed in
the hands of a present minority, it would be fully justified in
recognizing this organization as a member of the old Union. But to set
up a mere sham, and pretend to rebuild a State on the basis of
inconsiderable numbers, against even the disloyal sentiments of the
great body of the people, would be unwise and unavailing. Such a
reconstruction would be hollow and deceptive, a danger and a snare,
forever threatening the tranquillity of the country.
The question is one of practical statesmanship; and the Government must
deal with it upon the principles of common sense, without embarrassing
itself by any mere theories which would be troublesome and inapplicable
in any emergency. How long after subjugation the Government will wait
for the return of any State to its allegiance, and what indications of
sincere loyalty will be accepted, as well as what fair and honorable
inducements will be held out to lure the erring population back into the
fold of the Union, are matters for the gravest consideration, and can
only be determined when the occasion for decision shall arise. To thrust
a State back into the Union, and clothe it with all its former
constitutional privileges, while the masses of its people are still
hostile to the Federal authority, would evince a degree of recklessness,
and even insanity, which, it is to be hoped, the Government will never
exhibit. But when a State is fit to return, and may properly and safely
be received, let her be welcomed cordially and heartily, without the
least reminiscence of her sad and disastrous error.
The true difficulty is not in the principle which is to control our
action in any given circumstances. That is sufficiently plain in itself;
it is only the application which is difficult. We cannot acknowledge the
equality and sisterhood of a State, which, though subdued, is still
hostile and not to be trusted in the Union: but we can and will receive
all those which truly accept the result of the war and honestly return
to their allegiance. We cannot create a State in the midst of a hostile
population, and maintain the sovereign right of an inconsiderable few
against the voice of the vast majority; but we can favor, encourage, and
build up the loyal minority when that is sufficiently important, so as
to make it the majority, and clothe it with the power of the
resuscitated State.
So long as there is no loyal State authority fairly representing the
people, the State must be considered as disabled, and its rights _in
abeyance_. There is no necessity of considering the State as
extinguished, while there is hope of a favorable change. To reduce the
States to the condition of territories would be an act of extreme
hostility, and could only be the ultimate result of incorrigible
treason, holding out against subjugation and against all the reasonable
inducements which can be offered to a rebellious people by a magnanimous
Government. We can never receive into the bosom of the Union a hostile
people, full of treason, and always ready for renewed mischief. Though
they be conquered in arms, we cannot compel their thoughts and
affections. Unless they yield these, force cannot win them; and we must
therefore hold the rein of control for our own security. The act of
recognition will be always determined by the will of the Federal
authorities. This right of decision necessarily places in their hands
the supreme control of those conditions which are necessary to our
future security.