324 



RECONSTRUCTION. 



ligations. This doctrine was opposed as having no 

 sanction in tin- principles applied to either individual* 

 or Slates, and in lad a- -ul.vi -r.-ivi- of the fundamental 

 principles of justice according to which, jis uuiv. 



would remain exclusively in a portion of the popu- 

 lation of those Slates, it was a vital political ques- 

 tion whether the representation in the House of 



Representative., from such States should be accepted 



on the basis of the entire |>opulation of th" accepted, a legal relation may exist and yet. ilu 



or be limited to that portion of the jMipiilalion the conduct of those affected by it, ix- deprived of all 



that was admitted to participation in it.s public an- its proper fruits and consequences, only to 1 



thority. To accept representation on the basis of a on such conditions as are agreeable to ju-tu-e or ac- 



population of which a large p.nt was excluded from ceptable to the parties affected by its negation. It 



political authority was regarded as allowing dispro- was contended that the principles of justice not only 



jx.rtionati! advantages ta resulting from principles demanded compensation for repudiated obligat" 



that were regarded by the remaining States as in- but. as applied to vital relationship, such as govern- 



:ent with popular government. 



mi MI. demanded security for the future observance of 



The first practical action demanded of Congress by such obligations, and that Congress could alone deter - 

 the attitude of affairs was to determine whether mine the character of the security demanded and 

 persons claiming to have l>een elected as senato s and include it in the conditions of restoration, 

 representative-, under the constitutions deriving their With a singular fatuity that often appears in the 

 authority from the action of the President should conduct of men and communities it w-i- 



:iittcd to those Ivodies. The power of Congress now. by those who had held to the right of a .1 

 to determine the qualiti -ations of its members was tied State to retire from the Union, that su 

 constitutional and undoubted and was conceded by was an impossibility, according to the nature of that 

 the President. In the pr< ihe exclusion of Union, thus conferring upon rights a quality th 



such persons as claimed election by the recently belongs to obligations, and ignoring the fact ti 



former arc dependent on the bet> of OOndoeL while 



the latter persist until dissolved by the act of those 



entitled to their benefit. 



The conclusion to which Congress arrived as I , i:s 



right to ascertain the conditions upon which restoration 



constituted States to representation in Congress was 

 dependent upon the question whether the constitu- 

 tions under which they claimed election were author- 

 itative, for unless wanting in validity their right could 

 not be pro|>erly denied. If the authority of Congress 



was needed to enable these States to recover their should depend opened for discussion the question of 



former places in the Union, it was equally needed to its proper terms and conditions. The prcvailnig. 



enable them to establish domestic government, for opinion in Congress was that lor sonic indefinite time. 



that government could only be habilitated as an in- some of the persons who had been most actively en 



tegral part of the Union. gaged in hostility to the Union should be excluded 



Acting upon these principles Congress excluded from participating in the exercise of public authority, 



the representatives from those Slates and thus in ef- 

 fect declared that the method of reconstruction that 

 h.id originated with the President was inco: 



Congress to retain in its own hands the authority to 

 terminate this exclusion when in it.s judgment de- 

 manded by the public-interest. Thistcniporary expedient 



tpe 



with the Constitution. It became necessary then for appeared to the majority in ('.ingress to be. called for 

 I '"tigress to initiate a plan for restoring those Strtesto ; both upon grounds of justice and prudence. War bad 



i VT i i l i f 1_ L. * il*'l^' l * * 



the I'nion and to prescribe the conditions of such res- 

 toration. Fundamental to such action was the ques- 

 tion whether the States that had attempted B. 

 were to be regarded as having deprived themselves of 

 the constitutional rights common to the States of the 

 I'nion in view of the concession that they could not 

 without the consent of the remaining States escape 



from the obligations incident to such constitutional in violation of the allegiance due to the United States. 

 relationship. If it was possible tor a State by denying and as such, taking the form of war. was an act of 

 its obligations to the Union to deprive itself of its treason against that government. The acknowle.iir- 

 rigbt.-i under that Union, vcrv clearly such a case had ment of the existence of belligerent relations, if it did 



l 1*1 i*J iL " A 1 11 U * 1 ] *U * 1_ II* i* .1 



been waged against the United States by a portion of 



its citizens, and the very question submitted to the ar- 

 bitrament of arms was whether that act of war was an 

 act of tre;ison agains-t the United States. One party 

 claimed that it wa.s in the exercise of a right inherent 

 in the conditions of the Union that w;us unjustly re- 

 sisted, while the other party insisted that the act was 



been presented in the aet of secession and the inaugur- 

 ation of war against the United States. If the 

 seceding States had lost their rights under the Union 

 while their obligations remained unchanged, cither 

 the performance of an act of justice or the consent of 

 the aggrieved party was essential to the restoration of 

 such rights. If, however, the opposite view was taken 

 that t. mid not by any act deprive themselves 



of their rights under the Union, ev. n though an act 

 of Recession and war intervened, then their indepen- 

 dent right to reorganize their internal governments in 

 their own way and to claim representation in Congress 

 unconditionally could not be denied. 



Congress was divided upon these questions, for 

 although a great majority of both houses concurred in 

 the view that lh. iiad forfeited their constitu- 



tional rights without evading their constitutional obli- 

 gations, yet a small but energetic minority maintained 

 the opposite doctrine and were unrestricted iii 

 pression. The position assumed in support of t In- 

 action of the President and the right of representation 

 of the persons, elected under this authority was that it 

 was impossible for a State to deprive itx-lf of its status 

 in the Union, whatever mightbc it- r hostility 



to the Union, and consequently that at the instant 



lly shield the actors in rebellion from thecon- 

 sc.|iiences of an act of treason as to acts done after that 

 recognition, had that effect practically. The termina- 

 tion of the war established the view entertained by the 

 Union and upon which it was conducted, and left those 

 who participated in hostility against the Union in the 

 attitude of having violated their allegiance to the 

 United States. The question of the sincerity of the 

 convictions of those engaged in the war in opposition 

 to the Union being one of morals, could not enter 

 into the legal nnd practical solution. To restore at 

 once and without probation those whom the war had 

 placed in this attitude to the exercise of the highest 

 public authority of the nation seemed to the majority 

 in Congress as equivalent to a declaration that either 

 the violation of allegiance to the United Slat 

 tint an act deserving of severe condemnation, or that 

 the surrender of the armies in the field was an act 

 that obliterated the consequences and the memory of 

 Moii'. a"d conferred a new civil quality upon 



those by whom it had been performed. 

 The majority in Congress also hesitated to commit 

 pie who had been raised from the condition of 

 hroiigh the eventualities of a war brought on 

 by the desire to hold them in perpetual slavery to 



resistance to th-j Union ceased it wa.s in a condition to those who had sought to destroy the Union for the. 

 assume all ita right* and functions under the Constitu- j sake of perpetuating their slavery. The majority re- 

 tioo without any new coudition being added to its ob- ' gai'dud Congress as bound by every couaideratioii of 



