Further Attempts of the United States Government to overthrow
States.--Election of Members of Congress under the Military Governor
of Louisiana.--The Voters required to take an Oath to support the
United States Government.--The State Law violated.--Proposition to
hold a State Convention; postponed.--The President's Plan for making
a Union State out of a Fragment of a Confederate State.--His
Proclamation.--The Oath required.--Message.--"The War-Power our
Main Reliance."--Not a Feature of the Republican Government in the
Plan.--What are the True Principles?--The Declaration of
Independence asserts them.--Who had a Right to institute a
Government for Louisiana?--Its People only.--Under what Principles
could the Government of the United States do it?--As an Invader to
subjugate.--Effrontery and Wickedness of the Administration.--It
enforces a Fiction.--Attempt to make Falsehood as good as Truth.--
Proclamation for an Election of State Officers.--Proclamation for a
State Convention.--The Monster Crime against the Liberties of
Mankind.--Proceedings in Arkansas.--Novel Method adopted to amend
the State Constitution.--Perversion of Republican Principles in
Virginia.--Proceedings to create the State of West Virginia.--A
Falsehood by Act of Congress.--Proceedings considered under
Fundamental Principles.--These Acts sustained by the United States
Government.--Assertion of Thaddeus Stevens.--East Virginia
Government.--Such Acts caused Entire Subversion of States.--Mere
Fictions thus constituted.
But to resume our narration. On December 3d, in compliance with an
order of the military Governor Shepley, a so-called election was held
for members of the United States Congress in the first and second
State districts, each composed of about half the city of New Orleans
and portions of the surrounding parishes. Those who had taken the
oath of allegiance were allowed to vote. In the first district,
Benjamin F. Flanders received 2,370 votes, and all others 273. In the
second district, Michael Hahn received 2,799 votes, and all others
2,318. These persons presented themselves at Washington, and
resolutions to admit them to seats were reported by the Committee on
Elections in the House of Representatives. It was urged that the
military Governor had conformed in every particular to the
Constitution and laws of Louisiana, so that the election had every
essential of a regular election in a time of most profound peace,
with the exception of the fact that the proclamation for the election
was issued by the military instead of the civil Governor of the
State. The law required the proclamation to be issued by the civil
Governor; so that, if these persons were admitted to seats after an
election called by a military Governor, Congress thereby recognized
as valid a military order of a so-called Executive that
unceremoniously set aside a provision of the State civil law, and was
anti-republican and a positive usurpation. Again, all the departments
of the United States Government had acted on the theory that the
Confederate States were in a state of insurrection, and that the
Union was unbroken; under this theory, they could come back to the
Union only with all the laws unimpaired which they themselves had
made for their own government. Congress was as much bound to uphold
the laws of Louisiana, in all their extent and in all their parts, as
it was to uphold the laws of New York, or any other State, whose
civil policy had not been disturbed. Both those persons, however,
were admitted to seats--yeas, 92; nays, 44.
The work of constituting the State of Louisiana out of the small
portion of her population and of her territory held by the forces of
the United States still went on. The proposition now was to hold a
so-called State Convention and frame a new Constitution, but its
advocates were so few that nothing was accomplished during the year
1863. The object of the military power was to secure such civil
authority as to enforce the abolition of slavery; and, until the way
was clear to that result, every method of organization was held in
abeyance.
Meanwhile, on December 8, 1863, the President of the United States
issued a proclamation which contained his plan for making a Union
State out of a fragment of a Confederate State, and also granting an
amnesty to the general mass of the people on taking an oath of
allegiance. His plan was in these words:
"And I do further proclaim, declare, and make known that, whenever,
in any of the States of Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, and North
Carolina, a number of persons, not less than one tenth in number of
the votes cast in such State at the Presidential election of 1860,
each having taken the following oath and not having since violated
it, and being a qualified voter by the election laws of the State
existing immediately before the so-called act of secession, and
excluding all others, shall reestablish a State government which
shall be republican, and in nowise contravening said oath, such shall
be recognized as the true government of the State, and the State
shall receive thereunder the benefits of the constitutional provision
which declares that The United States shall guarantee to every State
in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each
of them against invasion; and, on application of the Legislature or
the Executive (when the Legislature can not be convened), against
domestic violence."
The oath required to be taken was as follows:
"I, ----- -----, do solemnly swear, in presence of Almighty God,
that I will henceforth support, protect, and defend the Constitution
of the United States and the Union of the States thereunder; and that
I will in like manner abide by and faithfully support all acts of
Congress, passed during the existing rebellion, with reference to
slaves, so long and so far as not repealed, modified, or held void by
Congress, or by decision of the Supreme Court, and that I will, in
like manner, abide by and faithfully support all proclamations of the
President, made during the existing rebellion, having reference to
slaves, so long and so far as not modified or declared void by
decision of the Supreme Court. So help me God!"
In a message to Congress, of the same date with the preceding
proclamation, the President of the United States, after explaining
the objects of the proclamation, says:
"In the midst of other cares, however important, we must not lose
sight of the fact that the war-power is still our main reliance. To
that power alone can we look, for a time, to give confidence to the
people in the contested regions that the insurgent power will not
again overrun them."
The intelligent reader will observe that this plan of the President
of the United States to restore States to the Union, to occupy the
places of those which he had been attempting to destroy, does not
contain a single feature to secure a republican form of government,
nor a single provision authorized by the Constitution of the United
States. With his usurped war-power to sustain him in the work of
destruction, he found it easy to destroy; but he was powerless to
create or to restore. In the former case, he had gone imperiously
forward, trampling under foot every American political principle, and
breaking through every constitutional limitation. In the latter case,
he could not advance one step without recognizing sound political
principles and complying with their dictates. On each foundation he
must construct, or his work would be like the house founded on the
sand.
It will now be shown what the true principles are, and then that the
President of the United States perverted them, misstated them, and
sought to reach his ends by groundless fabrications--as if he would
enforce a fiction or establish a fallacy to be as good as truth. It
might be still farther shown, if it had not already become
self-evident, that this method was pursued with such a perversity and
wickedness as to render it a characteristic feature of that war
administration on whose skirts is the blood of more than a million of
human beings.
The whole science of a republican government is to be found in this
sentence of the Declaration of Independence, made by the
representatives of the United States of America, in Congress
assembled, on July 4, 1776. It says:
"That, to secure these rights [certain unalienable rights],
governments are instituted among men--deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of
government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the
people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government,
laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers
in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their
safety and happiness."
Thus it will be seen that civil and political sovereignty was held to
be implanted by our Creator in the individual, and no human
government has any original, inherent, just sovereignty whatever, and
no acquired sovereignty either, beyond that which may be granted to
it by the individuals as "most likely to effect their safety and
happiness." "Deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed," says the Declaration of Independence. All other powers
than those thus derived are not "just powers." Any government
exercising powers "not just" has no right to survive. "It is the
right of the people to alter or abolish it," says the Declaration of
Independence, "and to institute a new government."
Who, then, had a right to "institute" a republican government for
Louisiana? No human beings whatever but the people of Louisiana; not
the strangers, not the slaves, but the manhood that knew its rights
and dared to maintain them. Under what principles, then, could a
citizen of Massachusetts, whether clothed in regimentals or a
civilian's dress, come into Louisiana and attempt to set up a State
government? Under no principles, but only by the power of the invader
and the usurper. If the true principles of a republican government
had prevailed and could have been enforced when Major-General Butler
appeared at New Orleans, he would have been hanged on the first
lamp-post, and his successor, Major-General Banks, would have been
hanged on the second.
Under what principles, then, could the Government of the United
States appear in Louisiana and attempt to institute a State
government? As has been said above, it was the act of an invader and
a usurper. Yet it proposed to "institute" a republican State
government. The absurdity of such intention is too manifest to need
argument. How could an invader attempt to "institute" a republican
State government? an act which can be done only by the free and
unconstrained action of the people themselves. It has been charged
that this and every similar act of the President of the United States
was in violation of his duty to maintain and observe the requirements
and restrictions of the Constitution, and to uphold in each State a
republican form of government. To specify, the following is offered
as an example. He did "proclaim, declare, and make known--
that, whenever any number of persons, not less than one tenth of the
number of voters at the last Presidential election, shall reestablish
a State government, which shall be republican [!] and in no wise
contravening said oath, such shall be recognized as the true
government of the State."
One tenth of the voters can not establish a republican State
government, which requires the consent of the people of the State to
make its powers just, as has been shown above. Therefore, such a
government had not one element of republicanism in it. But what is
astonishingly remarkable is the stultification of requiring the one
tenth of the people to "reestablish a State government, which shall
be republican and in no wise contravening said oath." Either he did
not know how a republican State government was "instituted," or, if
he knew, then he was a participant in that perversity and wickedness,
which was above charged to be the characteristic of his war
Administration.
It will now be shown how he sought "to enforce a fiction or establish
a fallacy to be as good as truth." Of the government thus established
by one tenth of the voters, he says:
"Such shall be recognized as the true government of the State, and
the State shall receive thereunder the benefits of the constitutional
provision which declares that 'the United States shall guarantee to
every State in this Union a republican form of government.'"
It is proper here to inquire who and what was the tenth to whom this
power to rule the State was to be given. It will be seen, by
reference to the proclamation, that each voter of the one tenth, in
order to be qualified, is required to take an oath with certain
promises in it, which are prescribed by an outside or foreign
authority. This condition of itself is fatal to a republican State
government, that "derives its just powers from the consent of the
governed." Free consent--not cheerful consent, but unconstrained and
unconditioned consent--is required that "just powers" may be derived
from it. In this instance, the invader prescribes the requisite
qualifications of the voter, and makes it a condition that the
government established shall "in no wise contravene" certain
stipulations expressed in the oath taken to give the qualification. A
State government thus formed derives its powers from the consent of
the invader, and not "from the consent of the governed." It has no
"just powers" whatever. It is a groundless fabrication. Yet the
President of the United States declared, "The State shall receive
thereunder the benefits of the constitutional provision which
declares that 'the United States shall guarantee to every State in
this Union a republican form of government.'" Is not this an attempt,
while pretending to establish, to destroy true republicanism?
Now, let the reader bear in mind that these remarks relate to
Louisiana alone, of which more remains to be told; and that there
were eleven States that withdrew from the Union, whose restoration
was to be effected on this rotten system, in addition to several
constitutional amendments, the adoption of which was to be effected
and secured by the votes of these groundless fabrications, in which a
fiction was to be considered as good as the truth. Having attained
all these facts which are yet to be stated, he may begin to form some
estimate of the remnants of the Constitution, and of the probable
existence of any true union of the States.
To proceed with the narration. Under the above-mentioned proclamation
of the President of the United States, Major-General Banks issued at
New Orleans, on January 11, 1864, a proclamation for an election of
State officers, and for members of a State Constitutional Convention.
The State officers, when elected, were to constitute, as the
proclamation said, "the civil government of the State under the
Constitution and laws of Louisiana, except so much of the said
Constitution and laws as recognize, regulate, or relate to slavery,
which, being inconsistent with the present condition of public
affairs, and plainly inapplicable to any class of persons now
existing within its limits, must be suspended." The number of votes
given for State officers was 10,270. The population of the State in
1860 was 708,902. The so-called Government was inaugurated on March
4th, and on March 11th he was invested with the powers hitherto
exercised by the military Governor for the President of the United
States. On the same day Major-General Banks issued an order relative
to the election of delegates to a so-called State Convention. The
most important provisions of it defined the qualifications of voters.
The delegates were elected entirely within the army lines of the
forces of the United States. The so-called Convention assembled and
adopted a so-called Constitution, declaring "instantaneous,
universal, uncompensated, unconditional emancipation of slaves." The
meager vote on the Constitution was, for its adoption, 6,836; for its
rejection, 1,566. The vote of New Orleans was, yeas 4,664, nays 789.
This state of affairs continued after the close of the war. Violent
disputes arose as to the validity of the so-called Constitution. The
so-called Legislature elected under it adopted Article XIII as an
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, prohibiting the
existence of slavery in the United States.
It will be seen from these facts that the State of Louisiana was not
a republican State instituted by the consent of the governed; that
its Legislature was an unconstitutional body, without any "just
powers," and that the vote which it gave for the amendment of the
Constitution of the United States was no vote at all; for it was
given by a body that had no authority to give it, because it had no
"just powers" whatever. Yet this vote was counted among those
necessary to secure the passage of the constitutional amendment. Was
this an attempt to enforce a fiction or to establish the truth? Such
are the deeds which go to make up the record of crime against the
liberties of mankind.
The proceedings in Arkansas to "institute" a republican State
government were inaugurated by an order from the President of the
United States to Major-General Steele, commanding the United States
forces in Arkansas. At this time the regular government of the State,
established by the consent of the people, was in fall operation
outside the lines of the United States army. The military order of
the President, dated January 20, 1864, said:
"Sundry citizens of the State of Arkansas petitioned me that an
election may be held in that State, in which to elect a Governor;
that it be assumed at that election, and thenceforward, that the
Constitution and laws of the State, as before the rebellion, are in
full force, except that the Constitution is so modified as to declare
that there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude," etc.
The order then directs the election to be held for State officers,
prescribes the qualifications of voters and the oath to be taken, and
directs the General to administer to the officers thus chosen an oath
to support the Constitution of the United States, and the "modified
Constitution of the State of Arkansas," when they shall be declared
qualified and empowered immediately to enter upon the duties of their
offices.
The reader can scarcely fail to notice the novel method here adopted
to modify or amend the State Constitution. It should be called the
process by "assumption"--that is, assume it to be modified, and it
is so modified. Then the President orders the officers-elect to be
required to swear, on their oath, to support "the modified
Constitution of the State of Arkansas." Now, unless the Constitution
was thus modified by assuming it to be modified, these State officers
were required by oath to support that which did not exist. But it was
not so modified. No Constitution or other instrument in the world
containing a grant of powers can be modified by assumption, unless it
be the Constitution of the United States, as shown by recent
experience. Yet the chief object for which these officers were
elected and qualified was to carry out these so-called modifications
of the State Constitution. This adds another to the deeds of darkness
done in the name of republicanism.
Meantime some persons in the northern part of Arkansas, acting under
the proclamation of December 8, 1863, got together a so-called State
Convention on January 8, 1864, and adopted a revised Constitution,
containing the slavery prohibition, etc. This was ordered to be
submitted to a popular vote, and at the same time State officers were
to be elected. President Lincoln acceded to these proceedings after
they had been placed under the direction of the military commander,
General Steele. The election was held, the Constitution received
twelve thousand votes, and the State officers were declared to be
elected. Then Arkansas came forth a so-called republican State,
"instituted" by military authority, and, of course, received the
benefit of the constitutional provision, which declares that "the
United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a
republican form of government." It should be added that Arkansas,
thus "instituted" a State, was regarded by the Government of the
United States as competent to give as valid a vote as New York,
Massachusetts, or any other Northern State, for the ratification of
Article XIII, as an amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, prohibiting the existence of slavery in the United States.
The vote was thus given; it was counted, and served to make up the
exact number deemed by the managers to be necessary. Thus was fraud
and falsehood triumphant over popular rights and fundamental law.
The perversion of true republican principles was greater in Virginia
than in any other State, through the coöperation of the Government of
the United States. In the winter of 1860-'61 a special session of the
Legislature of the State convened at Richmond and passed an act
directing the people to elect delegates to a State Convention to be
held on February 14, 1861. The Convention assembled, and was occupied
with the subject of Federal relations and the adjustment of
difficulties until the call for troops by President Lincoln was made,
when an ordinance of secession was passed. The contiguity of the
northwestern counties of the State to Ohio and Pennsylvania led to
the manifestation of much opposition to the withdrawal of the State
from the Union, and the determination to reorganize that portion into
a separate State. This resulted in the assembling of a so-called
convention of delegates at Wheeling on June 11th. One of its first
acts was to provide for a reorganization of the State government of
Virginia by declaring its offices vacant, and the appointment of new
officers throughout. This new organization assumed to be the true
representative of the State of Virginia, and, after various fortunes,
was recognized as such by President Lincoln, as will be presently
seen. The next act of the Convention was "to provide for the
formation of a new State out of a portion of the territory of this
State." Under this act delegates were elected to a so-called
Constitutional Convention which framed a so-called Constitution for
the new State of West Virginia, which was submitted to a vote of the
people in April, 1862, and carried by a large majority of that
section. Meantime the Governor of the reorganized government of
Virginia, above mentioned, issued his proclamation calling for an
election of members, and the assembling of an extra session of the
so-called Legislature. This body assembled on May 6, 1862, and,
adopting the new Federal process of assumption, it assumed to be the
Legislature of the State of Virginia. This body, or Legislature, so
called, immediately passed an act giving its consent to the formation
of a new State out of the territory of Virginia. The formal act of
consent and the draft of the new Constitution of West Virginia above
mentioned were ordered by this so-called Legislature to be sent to
the Congress of the United States, then in session, with the request
that "the said new State be admitted into the Union." On December 31,
1862, the President of the United States approved an act of Congress
entitled "An act for the admission of the State of West Virginia into
the Union," etc. The act recited as follows:
"_Whereas_, The Legislature of Virginia, by an act passed May 13,
1862, did give its consent to the formation of a new State within the
jurisdiction of the said State of Virginia, to be known by the name
of West Virginia," etc.
Again it recites:
"And whereas both the Convention and the Legislature aforesaid have
requested that the new State should be admitted into the Union, and
the Constitution aforesaid being republican in form, Congress doth
hereby consent that the said forty-eight counties may be formed into
a separate and independent State."
It were well to pause for a moment and consider these proceedings in
the light of fundamental republican principles. The State of Virginia
was not a confederation, but a republic, or nation. Its government
was instituted with the consent of the governed, and its powers,
therefore, were "just powers." When the State Convention at Richmond
passed an ordinance of secession, which was subsequently ratified by
sixty thousand majority, it was as valid an act for the people of
Virginia as was ever passed by a representative body. The legally
expressed decision of the majority was the true voice of the State.
When, therefore, disorderly persons in the northwestern counties of
the State assembled and declared the ordinance of secession "to be
null and void," they rose up against the authority of the State. When
they proceeded to elect delegates to a convention to resist the act
of the State, and that Convention assembled and organized and
proceeded to action, an insurrection against the government of
Virginia was begun. When the Convention next declared the State
offices to be vacant, and proceeded to fill them by the choice of
Francis H. Pierpont for Governor, and other State officers, assuming
itself to be the true State Convention of Virginia, it not only
declared what notoriously did not exist, but it committed an act of
revolution. And, when the so-called State officers elected by it
entered upon their duties, they inaugurated a revolution. The
subsequent organization of the State of West Virginia and its
separation from the State of Virginia were acts of secession. Thus we
have, in these movements, insurrection, revolution, and secession.
The reader, in his simplicity, may naturally expect to find the
Government of the United States arrayed, with all its military
forces, against these illegitimate proceedings. Oh, no! It made all
the difference in the world, with the ministers of that Government,
"whose ox it was that was gored by the bull." She was the
nursing-mother to the whole thing, and to insure its vitality fed it,
not, like the fabled bird, with her own blood, but by the butchery of
the mother of States. The words of the Constitution of the United
States applicable to this case are these:
"No new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of
any other State; nor any State be formed by the junction of two or
more States, or parts of States, without the consent of the
Legislatures of the States concerned, as well as of the Congress." [61]
Will any intelligent person assert that the consent of the State of
Virginia was given to the formation of this new State, or that the
government of Francis H. Pierpont held the true and lawful
jurisdiction of the State of Virginia? Yet the Congress of the United
States asserted in the act above quoted that "the Legislature of
Virginia did give its consent to the formation of a new State within
the jurisdiction of the State of Virginia." This was not true, but
was an attempt, by an act of Congress, to aid a fraud and perpetuate
a monstrous usurpation. For there is no grant of power to Congress in
the Constitution nor in the American theory of government to justify
it. If it is said that the government of Francis H. Pierpont was the
only one recognized by Congress as the government of the State of
Virginia, that does not alter the fact. The recognition of Congress
can not make a State of an organization which is not a State. There
is no grant of power to Congress in the Constitution for that
purpose. If it is said that the government of Francis H. Pierpont was
established by the only qualified voters in the State of Virginia,
that is as equally unfounded as the other assertions. Neither the
Congress of the United States nor the Government of the United States
can determine the qualifications of voters at an election for
delegates to a State Constitutional Convention, or for the choice of
State officers. There was no grant of power either to the President
or to Congress for that purpose. All these efforts were usurpations,
by which it was sought, through groundless fabrications, to reach
certain ends, and they add to the multitude of deeds which constitute
the crime committed against States and the liberties of the people.
When the question of the admission of West Virginia was before the
House of Representatives of the United States Congress, Mr. Thaddeus
Stevens, of Pennsylvania, declared, with expiatory frankness, that he
would not stultify himself by claiming the act to be constitutional.
He said, "We know that it is not constitutional, but it is necessity."
It now became necessary for the Government of Virginia, represented
by Francis H. Pierpont, to emigrate; for the new State of West
Virginia embraced the territory in which he was located. He therefore
departed, with his carpet-bag, and located at Alexandria, on the
Potomac, which became the seat of government of so-called East
Virginia. On February 13, 1864, a convention, consisting of a
representative from each of the ten counties in part or wholly under
the control of the United States forces, assembled at Alexandria to
amend the Constitution of the State of Virginia. Some sections
providing for the abolition of slavery were declared to be added to
the Constitution, and the so-called Convention adjourned. Nothing of
importance occurred until after the occupation of Richmond by the
United States forces. On May 9, 1865, President Johnson issued an
"Executive order to reestablish the authority of the United States,
and execute the laws within the geographical limits known as the
State of Virginia." The order closed in these words:
"That, to carry into effect the guarantee of the Federal Constitution
of a republican form of State government, and afford the advantage of
the security of domestic laws, as well as to complete the
reestablishment of the authority of the laws of the United States and
the full and complete restoration of peace within the limits
aforesaid, Francis H. Pierpont, Governor of the State of Virginia,
will be aided by the Federal Government, so far as may be necessary,
in the lawful measures which he may take for the extension and
administration of the State government throughout the geographical
limits of said State."
This order recognized the factitious organization, which was begun in
West Virginia and then transplanted to Alexandria, as the true
government of the State of Virginia, and, by the aid of the United
States Government, was now removed to Richmond and set up there. No
person was allowed to take any part in this government or to vote
under it unless he had previously taken the purgatorial oath above
mentioned, and had not held office under the Confederate or any State
government. Thus, the taking of this oath, which was prescribed by
the President of the United States, became the most important of the
qualifications of a voter. Here was a condition prescribed by a
foreign authority as necessary to be fulfilled before the first act
could be done by a citizen relative to his State government. Such a
government was not republican, for its powers were not derived from
the consent of the governed. Its powers were derived from voters who
had, under oath, said:
"I will abide by and faithfully support all acts of Congress, passed
during the existing rebellion with reference to slaves, so long and
so far as not repealed, modified, or held void by Congress or by
decision of the Supreme Court; and that I will in like manner abide
by and faithfully support all proclamations of the President, made
during the existing rebellion having reference to slaves, so long and
so far as not modified or declared void by decision of the Supreme
Court."
Such a State government was not in the interest of the people, but in
the interest of the United States Government. The true republican
organization, which had been "instituted" by the free "consent of the
governed to effect their safety and happiness," had been repudiated
by the Government of the United States as in rebellion to it; and
this fiction had been set up, not by the free consent of the people,
which alone could give to it any "just powers," not "to effect their
safety and happiness," for which alone a republican State government
can be instituted, but solely to secure the safety and supremacy of
the Government of the United States. The qualification of the voter
was prescribed by the United States Government, and the oath required
him to recognize allegiance to the Union as supreme over that to the
State of which he was a citizen. Thus the voters under the State
government of Virginia were required first to protect the Government
of the United States, and then they were at liberty to look after
their own interests through the State government.
Now, it is charged that such acts on the part of the United States
Government were not only entirely unconstitutional, but they caused
the complete subversion of the States. The Constitution of the United
States knows States in the Union only as they are republican States.
The Government of the United States was conscious of this fact, and
publicly recognized it when it promised to guarantee a republican
form of government to each one that it sought to reconstruct. But it
violated the Constitution when it sought to place in the Union mere
fictions which had' not the first element of a republic, which were
groundless fabrications of its own minions that could not have
existed a day without the military support which they received.
Further, it is to be remembered that it does not come within the
grants of the Constitution, consequently not within the powers of the
Government of the United States, to institute a republican form of
government at any time or in any place. Such an act is neither
contemplated nor known in the Constitution, as such a government can
be instituted only by the free consent of those who are to be
governed by it. Any interference on the part of the United States to
limit, modify, or control this consent goes directly to the nature
and objects of the State government, and it ceases to be republican.
To admit a State under such a government is entirely unauthorized,
revolutionary, subversive of the Constitution, and destructive of the
Union of States.
[Footnote 61: Constitution of the United States, Article IV, section 3.]