CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



253 



single plan of reconstruction.' Second. That 

 the effect of the bill would be to set aside and 

 hold for naught the free State constitutions of 

 Louisiana and Arkansas, adopted under his 

 proclamation of 8th December. Third. That 

 he was unprepared to declare by an approval 

 of the bill ' a constitutional competency in Con- 

 gress to abolish slavery in States.' 



" The sufficiency of the President's reasons for 

 virtually vetoing the reconstruction bill were, 

 soon after the publication of his proclamation, 

 considered in an ^able paper made public by a 

 distinguishe'd Senator from Ohio (Mr. Wade) 

 and an equally distinguished member of this 

 House (Mr. Henry Winter Davis). The tenor 

 of their masterly and conclusive argument 

 against the President is best stated in their 

 own words, when they say of the President's 

 anomalous proclamation : 



A more studied outrage on the legislative author- 

 ities of the people has never been perpetrated. 



" And further : 



It is a blow at the friends of his Administration, at 

 the rights of humanity, and the principles of repub- 

 lican government. 



" These assertions, sir, answer, so far as their 

 authors are concerned, my question as to the 

 honesty of the President's constitutional doubt. 

 A studied outrage, sir, is not the fruit of an 

 honest doubt. 



" The President's will undid the work of his 

 friends in the last Congress in their efforts to 

 reconstruct States. The Executive triumphed 

 over the legislative power, and notwithstanding 

 his ' studied outrage on the legislative author- 

 ities of the people,' the majority in Congress 

 kissed the hand that smote them, and in spite 

 of the reconstruction bill, in defiance of its well- 

 matured provisions, Louisiana and Arkansas, 

 States reared and reconstructed under the Pres- 

 ident's hand and plan, upon the basis of martial 

 law, now knock confidently at our doors for 

 recognition. 



" The crisis of the election being past, a re- 

 newed effort is made by the committee on re- 

 bellious States to carry out their plan of recon- 

 struction. 



" The various forms in which the subject- 

 majfcter before the House has been presented, 

 the conflicting arguments which have been 

 urged in its support, all indicate that division 

 of counsel exists among those controlling legis- 

 lation here, and who, having a common pur- 

 pose, should have a common plan for its success. 



"The reconstruction bill of this session as 

 originally reported, contained a section (the 

 seventh) directly and without conditions recog- 

 nizing the government and constitution of Louis- 

 iana as organized under General Banks' procla- 

 mation. Why Arkansas was not included I do 

 not know; but the provision as to Louisiana 

 was evidently intended to propitiate the Presi- 

 dent to approve the bill. It seemed to be a 

 compromise between the House and the Presi- 

 dent, saying to him, ' You may take Louisiana 



by executive reconstruction, and we will re- 

 make Arkansas by congressional reconstruc- 

 tion.' For some reason this proposition has 

 been withdrawn from the committee's bill re- 

 ported by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ash- 

 ley), but it stands in the substitute of the gen- 

 tleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Eliot), accom- 

 panied by the further offering to the President 

 by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Arnold) of 

 a proposition virtually to confirm the emanci- 

 pation proclamation of January 1, 1863. The 

 committee's bill, as modified, now proposes to 

 recognize Louisiana and Arkansas under their 

 new constitutions, provided conventions of those 

 States shall incorporate into their constitutions 

 the conditions prescribed in the twelfth section 

 of the bill : and provided further that it shall 

 appear by the United States marshal's enrol- 

 ment that the persons who had taken the oath to 

 ' support the Constitution of the United States, 

 together with the citizens of the United States 

 from such States in the military or naval ser- 

 vice, amounted to a majority of the persons en- 

 rolled in the State. 



"As there is therefore a direct proposition 

 before the House to recognize unconditionally 

 the new government of Louisiana, I shall here 

 say what further I have to say on that subject. 

 The case of Arkansas I shall not specially dis- 

 cuss, for the principle of both cases is the same ; 

 both rest on the amnesty oath as a condition of 

 suffrage, and if Louisiana is not entitled to rec- 

 ognition, neither is Arkansas. 



" On these grounds, then, sir : first, because 

 it was initiated and built up by Federal military 

 power, exacting an unconstitutional and op- 

 pressive test oath as a basis or condition of suf- 

 frage, and creating a quasi duress over the peo- 

 ple of Louisiana ; and, secondly, because I have 

 no evidence that it is the act of the people of 

 Louisiana in any proper legal sense of the word, 

 I am opposed to recognizing the new govern- 

 ment and constitution of Louisiana as proposed 

 in this bill ; and I apply the same points of ob- 

 jection to the case of Arkansas. 



" Passing from the case of Louisiana I shall 

 consider with as little of detail as possible, 

 for I do not wish to weary the House, the 

 prominent features of the bill and amendments 

 before us. 



" Ostensibly and by its title the bill is one ' to 

 guarantee to certain States whose governments 

 have been usurped or overthrown a republican 

 form of government ; ' but the title is a mis- 

 nomer. The mask of the Constitution is on the 

 face of the bill ; but usurpation and despotism 

 are in its heart. The bill in fact is, as it is com- 

 monly called and known, a reconstruction bill. 

 What, in brief, does it contemplate and propose ? 



" 1. A temporary, provisional, civil govern- 

 ment by Federal officers, appointees of the 

 President, over the States in rebellion, as Ter- 

 ritories or military provinces for that is the 

 effect of the bill which shall disregard all 

 laws and usages of the State in favor of slavery, 

 and shall extend to negroes as to white men 



