Daily Dispatch, Volume 29, Number 239, 21 June 1866 — Page 1

. VOLUME 29. RICHMOND, THURSDAY MORNING, JUNE 21, I860 NUMBER 239.

TIIK IHSPATCII. BY anVARDIN * ELLYSON. ? I Ti.* ;m :: ^ PIsI'aTCH u to onhccrl- (?< r ?????>(. (tarn M? t< tfi* carrier w??kljr. v * ; - r *rn.iim , ' f.>r?l? month*; *l? j. rm ? .h f??r ? nhorw pertiW . ^mi wri;K!.\ :?;>rAT< h ?t #4 p?r *nr \ ? : * Mi f. r ?ix n> . r'h? i o? KKKn iMsr*r? m tnnam. ilirlimcw/ pinpntch. Till K>:>U ... JI NK 21, 1866. ///.Y /> V.v/7 tl'CTTOX. :> < ,|V>b.m ?"??"* ttt T,,K w1, ?t 1 1 1 1 1- ?? rilTKESof Ihr <?? ????' ,1,.- V..ur, ?t O.. ???"'< run..* ill? All lh?- JM?lr?. v | >?> MKlr ?r ? lor ?rl...e-Th." ?,,i <?? "???-?' *?""* ,?,u, N. ls.... turn >?"?? ?? ... ,1.. ?.U. """ ,.r.. " ?. - - ,""n ,r?n: ? wrclwrniloiw ??f ?*n*reM. ( 1 1 ???!. ISTKi'I'l 1. a minority of the joint , . i tin- Smite ami House ot ? - v,, constituted under thceon- ' " resolution of the 13th of Decemmaking it their duty to 4t inquire .edition of the States whu h ' , , ,. M>.< ailed Confederate States of , ' . t-. report whether they or ? ,'jVni arc entitled t<> he represented 11..UM- ot Congress, with leave to , 1 <>r otherwise," not being able ... j,, the measures recommended the majority or in the pounds upon 1. they base them, beg leave to report: , mkK'I "V 1H?. 1. ATK INStURKt-rtON I II K RKl.ATIONS OK TIIK STATIC. :i nrder t > obtain a correct apprehen- . , , ? t]?. subject. and as having a direct . uine upon it. tin- undersigned think it {.important eh arly to ascertain what was of tin- l.iti insurrection upon the ? ,t . ? t T i*- -stall's whore it prevailed , ? \ ii.-tn i.il (iovcrnmcnt, and of the 1 vel\ and individually of such , To tl.i> inquiry tliey therefore first uiselv? s. .,t .t* the States. l>sd the m-a:r-t ? : commencement, or at wj ' . ? ? tunc. letfrtllv dissolve the eon- . v""n tho>e States and tin- Ge- , ( j. >vi i nment f . i ,,M( .,?_ ^ , j.\r from *ius i?einz ? M.v abstract ioti/' it is a vital suit that connection was not i . ! Mates during the ent ire re- ' u, t. is completely component , ? .i , (' ,;e<l Mates as tliey Wt'Te [I t -llion and were hound by which the Constitution and entitled to all its privileges. I -hi > their ? ondition , , N;tc view alone .-an justify the }) rights' and privileges. ^ Thai ... , - the lliion can exist without t!.. -Ill is inconsistent with the . th< rnment and terms c .jrtmuion. In its nature the . :,t J. formed of and by States il rights and powers.^ States '.?town to the Constitution. ii : .rnj ation pi* r feet e<jnaliij Tlu-y were granted the ? .? . ;m the Senate, an I t : i?* .? - presented in the House s< lives ? the diflercm <? ii? the ?. _"ilated ? nl> by a difference lint every State, however i*' population, was secured <?ne re- : ,ve in that branch. Kach Mate .. !i? ri-jht.and the same riplit, t<? ? P te in the election of president . president, and all alike were sc. ? .! U rn tit of the judicial depart?iit. The t institution, too, was sub- ? : . d t ? i -ic people of each State si pa?lv. and adopt- -d by theni in that ca- ?\ . The convention which framed it, li re I, as the j were bound t<? do, i* a separate s, \ creijrntv ? that could sO.-e.-t.- \ t" the Constitution, c.\- ;?> its* consent. ? .indent was consequeTitly asK<?i .-.s.n. The equality, therefore, of ?? was the condition of the original states before tlie Ciovernno nt "us ! and such equality was not only .tevfered with, but guaranteed to w i ! in regard to the powers con- , ,, the Ceneral Government as v.se 'n served to the States or to the ... t I ... S! ltl'?

- equality i> secured to the ) ive been admitted into the v . the Constitution was adopted. -t.Jii- e tii*- State admitted has t<? he one of the United an "j'Oil foot'iii ) \clth tfu ori<jin<il ' i ? j>- 1 >rK,t*> l'tT.'* < -t r.tion, too, m? j'ar as most <?f -> t contains are concerned, ope- ?< 'iy upon the ]?c-i?|?Ie in their in. : aggregate capacity, and on all Kadi citizen, therefore, of every * tin* same allegiance to the (Jc- < i-.vi ? iinient, and is entitled to the )tfiti"ti. The obligation of this . it not within the legal power - State ??r of himself to annul or . . It i> made paramount and per- ? il, and for that very reason it is ilv the paramount duty of the Gene. vemrnent :>? allow to the citizeus . h State and to the State the rights 1 to both, and the protection necestheir full enjoyment. A citizen ? . ? :!>t. forfeit sueh rights by comk crime against the United States, v i : i? >11 ot' the same, where such t>y law, antecedently passed, is {.art of" the punishment. Hut a t :i its corporate capacity, be to such a forfeiture; for ai . under the Constitution, cau.u 'T be indicted for a crime. , j ?edirig, criminal or ? ifil, .tuted to deprive a State ? netits of the Constitution ; as against her any of the ures. Her citizens, be they uiy.maybe proceeded against i<t\\ and convicted, but the State ? . State of the Uhion. To con. : by the illegal conduct ot her own ? ean be withdrawn froui the virtually to concede the right of . :or what difference docs it make tin result, whether a State can .> secede, (a doctrine by -the .by ? maintained by statesmen north ? s s.,;:th.) or whether by the illegal ' ? ? her citizens, she ceases to U- a "'?f ? ? the Union? ' " ' i case the end is the same ; the ? V ence is, that by the one theory ' > by law to be sueh a State, and ? " t by crime, without and against H .t the doctrine is wholly erroneous. ? u? e in the Union mnst abide in it ; She can never withdraw from or 1 from it. A different principle ? -i ject the Union to dissolution at ?? lit .Jit ij> therefore alike peril. I ? I | i . 1 . ' do vs ?? see that it has any support in ' ' ??sea?ure? recommended by the ma jo. , > the committee. Theiiuurrectionary 1 ^re by these measure* conceded to : ?-'dies of the Union. The* pressed i

constitutional amendment is tol* Mibmittod to them an well ?s to other 8,11 ,1ns respect each is placed on lln * ? . ground, to consult a State not in the I ?? , on the propriety ot adopting# tional amendment to the C.overnim it | -'?w """''"'""'"J ^ 1'V tl,C VOt.'? ?f .""C.miSng to all the *; ,!?? VbU.ii before the itisnr. 'tion a constitutional amendment, make* ii^uiry tether all at this tune are in ?,u of the l*n ion a vital om . It th :irt. not, all should not be consulted. It thev arc thev should be, and should bt H Weans,.' they are. The very fact, | therefore, of such a submission concedes that the southern States are, and never erased to be, States of the I nion. TltK 4 ONCl.l'SlOX t PONTIUS POINT. Tested, theretbre, cither by the nature of our Government or bv the laws ot the Constitution, the insurrection, now hap. pilv and utterly suppressed, has in no respect changed the relations ot the States where it prevailed to the General <*?>vernment. On the contrary, they are to all intents and purges as complete!) i tati . of the Union as they ever were. In further support of this proposition, it it needed anv we nwv contidently appeal to the tact insi stated, that the very measure rccommended ronstitntional amendment to be submitted to such States, furnishes such l support. For locking iopnd regarding tin. ! rights of the other States, such a snbniis- ' sioii has no warrant or toundation esc* i-i j upon the hypothesis that they are as abso. i lutelv States of the I'nion as any ot the t other States. It can never be under any circumstances a "profitless abstraction, whether under the Constitution a State is or is not a State of the I num. It can never be such an abstraction whether Unpeople of a State once in the I'nion can voluntary or'bv compulsion acceptor l?e forced from the obligations it enjoins, or be deprived of the rights it confers or the ' protection it affords. A different doctrine necessarily leads to a dissolution of the I'nion. The Constitution supposes that insurrections may exist in a State, and provides for their suppression bv giving Congress the power to call o forth the militia " for the purpose. 1 he p..wer is not to subjugate the State within whose limits the insurrection may prevail, and to extinguish it as a State, but to preserve it as such by subduing the rebellion, bv acting on the individual persons engaged in it, and not on the State at all. The power is altogether conservative. It is t,. protect - State, not to destroy it : to prevent her being taken out of the I tnon by individual crime ; not in any con tin. "encv to put her out or keep her out. The continuance of the union ot the States i- necessary to the intended existence of the Government. The Government is formed by a constitutional associa- , lion of States, and its integrity depends on the continuance of the entire association. . Ii one State is withdrawn from it by any | cause, to that extent i- the union di*. | sol v i t!. Those that remain may exist as a ! government, but it i* not the very go- t verutnent the Constitution designs. That consists of all, and its character ns changed j and it- power is dimitiished by the absence , of any otic. WUA'I TltK oPPOSlTK PoCTKINh I.KAPs To. j A different principle leads to a disinte- 1 ^ration that must sooner or later result m ( The separation of all, and the consequent j destruction of the Government. To sup- ? pose that a power to preserve may at the option of the body to which it is given be ? used to destroy, isa proposition repugnant to common sense, and yet as the late in- j surrection was put down by means of that , power, that being the only one conferred, upon Congress to that end, that proposition is the one on which alone it can be pretended that the southern Stales are not in the Union now as well as the first. The idea that the war power, as such, has been used, or could have been used, to extinguish the rebellion is, in the judgment ?f the undersigned, utteilv without toundation. That power was given lor a dtjlercnt contingency of a conflict with other governments ? an international conflict. It it had been thought that the power was lo be resorted to to suppress a domestic stnte, the word- appropriate to that object would have been used. But so lar from this having been done, in the same section that confers it, an express provision is inserted to meet the exigency oi a domestic strife

or insurrection. To subdue that, authority is given to call out the militia. Whi ther in the progress j of the effort to suppress an insurrection the riirhts incident to war as between the United States and foreign nations may n? >t arise, is a question which in no way change.* the character of the contest as between the Government and the insurrectionist.*. The exercise of such rights may he found convenient or become necessary for the suppression of the rebellion, but the cha- \ ractcr of the conflict is in no way changed by a resort to them. That remains as at j first, and must, from its very nature, during its continuance, remain a mere contot, in which the Government seeks, and | can only seek, to put an end to the rebellion. That achieved, the original condition of things is at once restored. TWO jriMClAL DECISIONS REFERRED TO. Two judicial decisions have been made ! by judges of eminent and unquestioned ability, which fully sustain our views. In one ? that of Amy Warbick, before the United States District Court of Massachu- , sett* ? Judge Sprague, referring to the supposed e fleet of the belligerent rights which, it \sa.> conceded, belonged to the Govern- 1 ment during the rebellion, by giving, when suppressed, the rights of conquest, declared : 44 It has been supposed that if the Government have the right of a belligerent, then, after the rebellion is suppressed, it will have the right of conquest. That a State and its inhabitants may In* permanently divested ol all political advantages, and treated as foreign territory conquered by arms. This is an error ? a grave and dangerous error. Belligerent right cannot be exercised where there are no belligerent*. Conquest of a foreign country gives absolute, unlimited sovereign rights, but no nation ever makes such a conquest of itsown territory. If a hostile power, either from j without or within, takes and holds possession and dominion over any portion ol its territory, and the nation, by force of arms, ; expels or overthrows the enemy and sup- j presses hostilities, it acquires no new title, and merely regains the iKxssession of that j of which it has been temporarily deprived. 1 The nation acquires no new sovereignty, i but merely maintains it* previous rights. 41 When the United Slates take pusses- 1 sion of a rebel district, they merely vindi- j cate their preexisting title. Under de- i sj?otic governments confiscation may be ! unlimited, but under our Government the riyltt of sovereignty ovrr any port'um of a j State is jivm and limbed by tin- Constitution, j and will be the same after the war as it was before." In the other an appliration for hahea& corpus to Mr. Justice Nelson, one of the ( Judges of the Supreme Court of the Uni- j led States, by James Egan, to bo dis. j charged from an imprbowiwut to wblcli he I

had been sentenced by a military commission in South (Carolina, for tin* offence of murder alleged to have been committed in that State, ami the discharge was ordered, nnd in an opinion evidently carefully pre. pared, among other things, said : "For all that appears, the civil local courts of tho State of South Carolina were in the full exercise of their judicial function* at the time of this trial, as restored bv tho .suppression of the rebellion some seven months previously, and by the revival of the laws and tho reorganization of the State in obedience to and in conformity with its constitutional duties to the Union. Indeed, long previous to this, the provisional government had been appointed by the President, who is commander-in-chief the army and navy of the United States, (and whose will under martial law constituted the only rule of action,) for the special purpose of changing the existing state of things, and restoring the civil government over the people. In operation of this appointment, a new constitution had been formed, a governor ami legislature elected under it, ami the State placed in the full nu )<nfiwvt of all h?r constitutional right# and privileges . The constitutional laws of the Union were thereby enjoyed and obeyed, and were as authoritative and binding over the people of the State as in any other portion of the country. Indeed, the moment the rebellion was suppressed, and the Government growing out of it subverted, the ancient lairs resinnnl their accustomed stray , subject only to the new reorganization the ajyiuintmait of the proper officers to give them <>j>eratii?n and ?jf>ct . ' This organization and appointment of the public functionaries, which was under the superintendence and direction of the President, i?.? commander-in-chief of the army and navy of tin country, and who, as such, had previously governed ili*' from imperative necessity, by the force of nl.ir* law, had already taken place, and the necessity no longer existed. This opinion is the more authoritative than it might possibly be esteemed otherwise, from its being the lirst elaborate statement of the reasons which governed the majority of the Supreme Court, at the last term, in their judgment in the case of Milligan and others, that military commissions for the trial of civilians are not constitutional. Mr. Justice Nelson was one ot that majority, and of course was advised of the grounds of their decision. c submit that nothing could be more conclusive in favor <>f tho doctrine for which they arc cited than these judgments. In the one, the proposition of' conquest of a State as a right under the war to suppress the insiirrection is not only repudiated by Judge Sprague, but because of the nature of our Government is considered to be legally impossible. "The right of sovereignty over any portion of a State will," he tells us, "only be the same after the war as it was before." In the other, we are told "that the suppression of the rebellion restores the courts of the State, and that when her government is reorganized she at once i> in the futl enjoyment, or entitled to the full enjoyment, of all her constitutional rights and privileges." TUK KKI UT.OCAI. oHUOATIoNS OF THE GOVERNMENT AND TIIK CITIZEN'. Again, a contrary doctrine is inconsistent with the obligations w Inch the Government is under to each citizen of a State. Protection to each is a part of that obligation, protection not only as against a foreign but a domestic foe. To hold that it is in the power of any part of the people of a State, whether they constitute a majority or minority, by engaging in insurrection and adopting any measure in it> prosecution to make citizens who are not engaged it: it, but opposed to it, enemies of the I'nited States, having no right to the protection which the Constitution affords t<> citizens who are true to their allegiance, is as illegal as it would be flagrantly unjust. During the conflict the exigency of the strife may justify a denial of such protection, and subject the unoffending citizen to inconvenience and loss ; but the conflict over, the exigency ceases, and the obligation to atford him all the immunities and advantages of the Constitution ? one of which is the right to be represented in Congress ? becomes absolute and imperative. A different rule would enable the Government to escape a clear duty, and to commit a gross violation of the Constitution. It has been said that the Supreme Court have entertained a different doctrine in the prize cases. This, in the judgment of t he undersigned, is a clear misapprehension. One of the questions in those cases was, whether, in such a contest as was being waged for the extinguishment of the insurrection, belligerent rights, as be. t trim the I'latid Statu and othtr nations, belonged to the former. The court properly held that they did, but the parties engaged in the rebellion were designated a> traitors, and liable to be tried as traitors when the rebellion should terminate. Ii the Confederate States, by force of insurrection, became foreign States, and lost their character as States of the Union, then the contest was an international one, and treason was no more committed by citizens of the former against the latter than those of the latter against the former. Treason necessarily assumes allegiance to the Government, and allegiance necessarily assumes a continuing obligation to the Government. Neither predicament was true except upon the hypothesis that the old state of things continued; in other words, that the States, notwithstanding the insurrection, were continuously and are now States of the United States, and their citizens responsible to the Constitution and the laws. Second. What isthere, then, in the present political condition of such States that justifies their exclusion from representation in Congress * It is because they are without organized governments, or without governments republican in pofnt of form. In fact, we know that they have governments completely organized, with legislative, executive, and judicial functions. We know that they are now in successful operation. No one within their limits questions their loyalty, or is denied their protection. How they were formed, under what auspices they were formed, are inquiries with which Congress has no concern. The right of th* people of a State to form a government for themselves has never been questioned. In the absence of any restriction that right would be absolute, any form might be adopted that they might determine upon.

BIT ONE CONDITION* OK ADMISSION. The Constitution imposes hut a single restriction, that the government adopted shall be " of a republican form," and this is done in the obligation to guarantee every State such a form. It gives no power to frame a constitution for a State. It ope. rates alone upon one already formed by the State. In the words of the Federals, [No. 44, J 44 it supposes a preexisting go. vernment of the form which is to be guaranteed." It is not pretended that the existing go. vcrnmcnts of the States in quevtion are not of the required form. The objection is that they wore not legally established. But it is confidently submitted that that is a matter with which Congress has nothing to do. The power to establish or modify a State government belongs exclusively to the people of the State. When they shall exercise it, what provisions it *hali contain, it is their exclusive right to decide, and when decided their decision is obligatory upon everybody, and inde.

pendent of all Congressional control, if such government be republican. To con. vert sin obligation of guarantee into an authority to interfere in any way in 1 the formation of the government to be . guaranteed is to do violence to language, ir it is to be said that the President did ? illegally interfere in the reorganization of such governments, the answers are ob\i. oils. First. If it was true, if the people of such States not only have not, but do not complain of it, but, on the contrary, have pursued his advice, and are satisfied with and are living under the governments tliev have adopted, and those governments are republican in form, what right has | Congress to interfere or deny their legal existence ? Second. Conceding, for argument's take, tliat the President's alleged interference was unauthorized, does it not, for the same reason, follow that any like interference by Congress would he equally unauthorized? A different view is not to be maintained, because of the difference in the nature of the powers conferred upon Congress and the President? the one being legislative and the other executive; for it is equally and upon the same ground bevoud the scope of either to form a government for the people of a > State once in the Union, or to expel such 1 a State from the Union, or to deny, tern- j porarily or permanently, the rights which belong to a State and her people under the : Constitution. now CONGRESS LOSES CONTROL OVER THE STATES. Congress may admit new States, but a State once admitted ceases to he within its control, and can never again be brought within it. What changes her people may at any time think proper to make in her constitution is a matter with which neither Congress nor any department of the Go. vernment can interfere unless such changes make the State government anti-republi-can *",(l then it can only be done under the ' obligation to guarantee that it be republican. Whate . bcnthe exte"1 of the power conferred upon" \ \n the third section, article 4, of the Constitution, to admit new States, in what in. tuner and to what extent they can under that power interfere in the formation and character of the constitution of such States preliminary to admission into the Union, no I one has ever pretended that when that is! had the State can again be brought within its influence. The power is exhausted when once extended, the subject forthwith i raising out of its reach. The States admitted, like the original thirteen States, become at once and forever independent of congressional control. A different view would change the entire character of the Government, as itsframers and their cotemporarics designed and understood it to be. They never intended to make the State governments subordinate t<? the General Government. Each was to move supreme within its own orbit, but as each would not alone have met the exigencies of a government adequate to all the wants of the people, the two, in the language of Mr. Jefferson, constituted " coordinate departments ot one single and integral whole," the "lie having the power of legislation and the administration " in affairs which concerned tln'ir own citizensonly ; the other, 44 whatever concerned foreigners or citizens of other States," Within their respective limits each paramount. The States as t<> all powers not delegated to the General Government are as independent of that Government as the latter in regard to all powers that are delegated t<? it is independent of the governments ot the States. The proposition, then, that Congress can, by force or otherwise, under the war, or insurrectionary, or any other power, expel a State from the Union or reduce it to a territorial condition, and govern it as such, is utterly without foundation. The undersigned deetn it unnecessary to examine the question further. They leave it upon the observations submitted, considering it perfectly dear that States, notwithstanding occurring insurrections, continue to be States of the Union. Thirdly. It' this is so, it necessarily follows that the rights of States under the Constitution, as originally possessed and enjoyed by them, are still theirs ? and those I they are now en joying, as far aa they de- ! pend upon the executive and judicial departments of the Government. By each ot these departments they are recognized a> : States. By the one, all officers of the Government required by law to be appointed i in such States have been appointed, and are discharging without question their rej spective functions. By the other theyare, as States, enjoying tin* benefit, and subiected to the powers of that department, a fact conclusive to show that, in the estimation of the judiciary, they are, as they j were at tirst, States of the Union, bound . by the laws of the Union, and entitled to ail the rights incident to that relation. And ? yet, so far, they arc denied that right ; which the Constitution properly esteems j as the security of all the others ? that right, without which government is anyj thing but a republic ? is, indeed, but a 1 tyranny? the right of having a voice in ! the legislative department, whose laws bind them in person and in property. This, it is submitted, is a state of things without example in representative republican go- ! vernment : and Congress, as long as it I denies this right, is a mere despotism. , Citizens may be made to submit to it by ; force or dread of force ; but a fraternal spirit of good feeling towards those who I impose it, so important to the peace and prosperity of the country, are not to be hoped for, but rather unhappiness,diwatis1 faction, and enmity. ' THE QUESTION OF DANGER To THE UNION DISCUSSED* There is but one ground on which such j conduct can find any excuse? the sup. I posed public necessity, th<f peril of de- ; struction to which the Government would be subjected if the right was allowed. But for such a supposition there is not, in the opinion of the undersigned, even a shadow of foundation. The representatives of the States in ! which there was no insurrection, if the others were represented, would, in the , House, under the present apportionment, exceed the latter by a majority of seventyj two votes, and have a decided preponderance in the Senate. ^ hat danger to the I Government then can possibly arise irom | southern representation. Are the present ! senators and representatives fearful of themselves ? Are they apprehensive that they might be led to the destruction of our institutions by the persuasion or any other influence of southern members? How disparaging to themselves is such an apprehension ! Are they apprehensive that those who may succeed them from their : respective States may be so fatally led astray ? How disparaging is that supposition to the patriotism and wisdom of thtir constituents ! Whatever effect on mere party success in the future such a representation may have we shall not stop to inquire. The idea that the country j is to be kept in turmoil, States to be reduced to bondage, and their rights under the Constitution denied, and their citizens degraded, with a view to the continuance i in power of a mere political party, cannot for a moment be entertained without im- ! puting grave dishonesty of purpose and gross dereliction of duty to those who ma) entertain it. Nor do we deem it necessary to refer particularly to the evidence taken by the committee, to show that there

t iii t ho present condition of the ,s nothing in tne p ^ that people oT the ?? , of excuse*, on that ponnn, ?ur5,.lvc, .wntafx.n to VC in m?r opinion, the cvi. Hence most t(? bc r^ Uctiy U^wc.e^ o(^L?entenanuGcnc?l ^rant? his^toyftljy and investigations no one ca ? ? ? pe. "i# teW ^STtly it-hed &o'mh Carolina, North Carolina, and Geor. mui I sy,.r 7n'/c/i conversed freely triffc M citi-w of tf?,se States , as- .reft as- iritt # of the army mho have been ' The following are the conclusions co ky?Tam satisfied that Ik moss o/ Hi' flfcmfc,..r. ,./ (V souHi '"XT' "' ,/ Vh,,il, ration <>/ ^'/' divided tpiestions which have heretofore lm Ml tL sentiment, of . J ^ ^ sections ? slavery and State rigm l?y the .n.lyaccepkd \ Im that noir II, ????moke of ? Mv observations lead me to th , ? * Z, tho citizens of the southern elusion that the cui/An ,,g0vern. States <tvs)0iu> to nvirn ) J J _ 1 4 W,1 i.v ***?<*? ??;; ! nJl.umUialw,, to Ikcm '<?" if such a course was pom cd out, be? .a.. ..iirsuc it in good .t mill. " u Wom;; '! f/i?f thrre cannot U a yreater com^''f'l^'nt this time bet '.rem tk'Cituei* of j rnmilnuj \ (in,/ particularly of those the t?rn M y. , atfi ifltr.Vinkintj p>nnr. entrusted ir x ^ practical doctrine ever Secession, i? ' rted to, is almost uthereafter to beN T( WJW sub?iittcd to and tcrlv abandoned. >. i?aj 0f battle. N?r ?failed before the or^f . e why> if its i can the undersigned lui^ possible, the revival is anticipated as . ?.nje(| an committee have not r^co,V!i?iVuardi]ig amendment to the Constitution K-wnt| ? V ;? it, tertiis Such an amentlV ifcinnot he doubted, the southern as we. a, tile northern States would cl.oerf ly adopt. The omission ot such a ? commendation is pregnant evidence j * ? J eessioti as a constitutional right, is thought bvthe majoritv of the committee to 1m ? u ea v a mere thing of the j.ast, as all ta.'w.f taken I.v them show ,t to he n ' ? ? ?? nil t)u? leading southern the opinion ot all the lea mg , men who hitherto entertained it. 1 no uti "elation around them, the hecatombs ol their own slain, the stern patriotism of the " , ' other States, exhibited by unlimited expenditure ol' treasure and I I,1, ??1, and their love of the I ? eere and deep-seated that it is sure the} w ill 1 ha, a d all to maintain it, have convinced he I South that as a practical d^rme seeessjon then* al !am lot u' d , ^slavery alwlished ^y ?rSy-j. i iifh States be denied all the Israel the X'it'th'at I I ... States ot the l nion. -yi * to do so at the earliest period is demanded "veverv consideration of duty and polio, saiid none denv that the actual lnterest of i In trv is* to a great extent, involved t JS l minion. The staple productions i ::; r;,c southern ?.t? are as mportald ? the other States as tothemseUes. In . staples largely enter into the wants of all ?ilike and they are also most nnportant to 'the financial 'credit of the Government I Those staples will never be produced an in the i.ast until real peace, resting as it can ! ^ lone rest , on the e!,nal and unilorm ope. | ration of tlie Constitution and laus on all, | is attained.

WHAT MAY REASONABLY BE EXPECTED FROM THE SOUTH. To suppose that a brave and sensitive people will give an undivided attention to the increase of mere material wealth, whilst retained in a state of political inferiority and degradation, is mere folly. They desire to be again in the Union, to enjoy the benefits of the Constitution, and they invoke you to receive them. They have adopted constitutions free from any intrinsic objection, and have agreed to every stipulation thought by the President to be necessary for the protection and benefit of all, and, in the opinion of the undersigned, they are amply sufficient. "Why exact, as a preliminary condition to representation, more ? What more are supposed to be necessary ? First, the repudiation of the rebel debt; second, the denial of all obligations to pay for manumitted slaves ; third, the inviolability of our own debt. If these provisions are deemed necessary they cannot be defeated, if the south were disposed to defeat them, by the admission into Congress of their representatives. Nothing is more probable, in the opinion of the undersigned, than that many of the southern States would adopt them all ; but those measures the committee connect with others, which, we think, the people of the south will never adopt. They are asked to disfranchise a numerous class of their citizens, and also to agree to diminish their representation in Congress and, of course, in the electoral college, or to admit to the right of suffrage their colored males of twenty-one years of age and upwards (a class now in a condition of almost utter ignorance), thus placing them on the same political footing with white citizens of that age. For reasons so obvious that the dullest may discover them, the right is not directly asserted of granting suffrage to the negro. That would be obnoxious to most of the northern and western States- so much so that their consent was not to be anticipated. But as the plan adopted, because of the limited number of negroes in such States, will have no effect on their repretation, it is thought it may be adopted, whilst in the southern States it will materially lessen their number. That these latter States will assent to the measure can hardly be expected. The effect, then, if not the purpose, of the measure is forever to deny representatives to such States, or, if they consent to the condition, to weaken their representative power, and thus probably secure a continuance of such a party in power as now control the legislation of the Government. The measure, in its terms and its effect, whether designed or not, is to degrade the southern States. To consent to it is to consent to their own dishonor. TUE NEW AMENDMENT SOT PROPERLY PROPOSED. The manner, too, of presenting the proposed constitutional amendment, in theopi. i nion of the undersigned, is impolitic and [ without precedent. The several amendments suggested have no connection with each other. Kach, if adopted, would have its ap. propriate effect if the others were rejected, and each, therefore, should be submitted as a separate article, without subjecting it to the contingency of rejection it' tlie State;

?honld refuse to ratify the rest. Each by itself if an advisable measure, should be submitted to the people, and not in such a connection with those which they ma) think unnecessary or dangerous as to them to reject all. The repudiation of the rebel debt and all obligation to compensate for the loss of slave property, and the inviolability of the debt of the Government, no matter how contracted, provided for by some of the section* of the amendment, we repeat, would meet the approval of many of the southern States. But these no State rati sanction without sanctioning others which, we think, will not be done by them or some of the northern States. To force negro suffrage upon any State by means of the penalty of a loss of part of its representation will not only be to impose a disparaging condition, but virtually to interfere with the clear right of each State to regulate suffrage for , itself without the control of the Govern- j ment of the United States. Whether that control lie exerted directly or indirectly, it . will be considered, as it is, a fatal blow to > the right which every State in the past has held vital? the right to regulate her franchise. To punish a State for not regula- j ting it in a particular way, so as to give to all classes of the people the privilege of suffrage, is but seeking to accomplish inei- 1 dentally what, if it should be done at all, should "be done directly. No reason, in the j view of the undersigned, can be suggested for the course adopted other than a belief | that such a direct interference would not j he sanctioned by the northern and western : States, whilst as regards such States the actual recommendation because of the ; small proportion of negroes within their . limits will not in the least lessen their representative power in Congress, or their j influence in the Presidential election, and they therefore sanction it. .This very in- 1 equality in its operation upon the States j renders the measure, In our opinion, most , unjust, and, looking to the peace and quiet j of the country, most impolitic. But the j mode advised is al*> not only without, but against all precedent. When the Constitu- ' tion was adopted, it was thought to be defective in not sufficiently protecting certain rights of the States and the people. | With the view of supplying a remedy for j this defect, on the 4th of March, 17W, various amendments, by a resolution constitutionally passed by Congress, were submitted for ratification to the States. They were twelve in number. Several of them were even less independent of each other than are those recommended by the committee ; but it did not occur to the men of ! that day that it was right to force the I States to adopt or reject all. Each was therefore presented as a separate artieh .Jhe language of the resolution was, " that blowing articles be proposed to the i ? 'i Vr?'s of the several States as amendlegwatTV. Constitution of the United inents of the , ichich articles, when States ,<dlor ?"? ?, . sai,l lvgh. ratifictl !'} ttiiL't ? t0?ts an,! mirlatures, are valid to all "^^wion. The poses as part of the Const itnt> t0 Congress of that day was wiftc^ obtain either of the submitted amCi^( mcnts ? to get a part, if not able to procure the whole. They thought ? and in that, we submit, they but conformed to the letter and spirit of the amendatory clause of the Constitution ? that the people have the l ight to pass severally on any proposed amendments. This course of our fathers is now departed from, and the resuU will probably be that no one of the suggested amendments, though some may be approved, will be ratified. Ihis will certainly be the result unless the States are willing practically to relinquish the right they have always enjoyed, never before questioned by any recognized states, man, and all-important to their interests i and security, the light to regulate the j franchise in all their elections. (JKNKRAL CONSIDERATIONS. There are, too, some general considerations that bear on the subject, to which we I will now refer : i First. One of the resolutions of the Chicago Convention, by which Mr. Lincoln i was lir^t nominated f?>r the Presidency, says "that the maintenance t inviolate of th?? riylds of the States " is essential to the balance of power on which the prosperity and endurance of our political fabric depends. In his inaugural address of March 4, 1861, which received the almost universal approval of the people, amongst other things he said : " Ao* State of its oirn mrre motion can Uiwfulty jet out of the Union "and that in view of the Constitution and the laws the Union is unbroken, and to the extent of my ability I shall take care, as the Constitution itself expressly ! enjoins upon m?\ that the laws of the | Union be faithfully executed iti all the i States."

Second. Actual conflict soon afterwards 1 ensued. The south, it was believed, misapprehended the purpose of the Government in carrying it on, and Congress deem ed it important todispelthat misapprehension by declaring what the pnrjwse was. This was done in July, IKfil, by their pass, ing the following resolution of Mr. Crit- i tenden : "That in this national emergency, Con- j gress, banishing all feeling of mere passion or resentment, will recollect only its duty to the whole country ; that this war is not waged upon our part in any spirit of oppression, nor for any purpose of conquest or subjugation, nor purpose of overthrow- | ing or interfering with the rights or estab- ? lishcd institutions of those States, but to 1 defend and maintain the supremacy of the I Constitution, and to preserve the Union, I with all th" dignity, equality, and rights ! of the Stat- a unimpaired ; that as soon as these obi' cts are accomplished the nar ought to cease." The vote in the House was one hundred and nineteen for and two against it, and in the Senate thirty for and rive against it.' The design to conquer, or subjugate, or to curtail or interfere in any way with the rights of the States is in the strongest terms thusdisclaimed.and the only avowed object asserted to be 44 to defend and maintain the spirit of the Constitution, and to preserve the Union and thk dioxitt, EQt'ALlTY, AM) RlUHTrf OF THK XKVBJUf. j Statics i ntmpairkd." Congress, t<?o, by ? the act of 13th July, 1*61, empowered the ' President to deciare by proclamation 44 that the inhabitants of such State or States where the insurrection existed, are in a state of insurrection against the Uni- ! ted States," and thereupon to declare that i 44 all commercial intercourse, by and between the same, by the citizens thereof and the citizens of the United States, shall cease and be unlawful so long as ouch condition of hostility shall continue ** Here, also, Congress evidently deals with the Sutes as being in the Union, and to remain in the Union. It seeks to keep them in by forbidding commercial intercourse between their citizcn* and the citizen* of the other States, so long, and .s*o long only, insurrectionary hostility shall continue. That ended, they are to be, as at first, entitled ! to the same intercourse with citizens ( of other States that they enjoyed before I the insurrection. In other words, in this act, as in the resolution of the saine month, th? dignity, equality, and rights of such States (the insurrection ended) were not to be held, in any respect, iinj^ircd. THK JUKDONS UFAVTKD AND TQKJK !?*<?. The several proclamations of amnesty i issued by Mr. Lincoln and his success* . under the authority of Congreas are also i inconsistent with the ids* that the parties

THE DISPATCH: TERMS OF ADVERTUUM& Om MUI1, AM f 2 On# aqaare, two lriMrtiOflf.. * ? Oof Mtw, tb?? * 2 Oneaqauv, ?ixtM?rtlo??.... ? J: On?aqa*r?, tW?lT? lUMTtkm* ? ? ? ** 0n? nqnitr*, on? month Jr <>n?*|n?r?, two month* OiMtqiurt, IbrM Booth* ????? ~ ?? ncluded within them are not to be held in the future restored to all right? belong, injf to them a* citirens of their respective States. A power to pardon is a power to restore the offender to the condition in which he was 1-efore the date of the offence pardoned. It is now settled that a pardon remotes not only the punishment, hut all legal disabilities consequent on the crime.? (7 Bac. A. B. Tit. Far.) Bishop on Criminal Law (vol. 1, p. 713) states the same doctrine. The amnesties so declared would be but false pretences if they were, as now held, to leave the parties who have availed themselves of them in almost every particular in the condition they would have been in if -they had rejected them. Such a result, it is submitted, would be a foul blot on the good name of the nation. Upon the whole, therefore, in the present state of the country, the excitement which exists, and which may mislead legislatures already elected, we think that the mature sense of the people is not 'likely to be ascertained on the subject of the proper d amendment by its submission to exist ing State legislatures. If it should be done at all, the submission should either l>e to legislatures hereafter to be elected or to conventions of the people chosen for the purpose. Congress may select either mode, but they have selected neither. It may bo submitted to legislatures already in existence whose members were heretofore elected with no view to the consideration of such a measure. And it may consequently be adopted, though a majority of the people of the States disapprove of it. In this respect, if there were no other objections to it, we think it most objectionable. Whether regard b? had to the riature or the terms of the Constitution, oi to tlie legislation of Congress during the insurrection, or to the course of the judicial department, or to the conduct f >1 the Executive, the undersigned confidently submit that the southern States are States in the Union, and entitled to every right ami privilege trclonging to the j other .States. If any |?ortion of their citizens be disloyal, or are not able to take any oath of office that has been or may be I constitutionally prescribed, is a question irrespective of the right of the States to ' be r? presented. Against the danger, whatever that may be, of the admission of disloyal or disqualified members into the Senate or House, it is in the power of each braueh to provide against by refusing such admission. Each by the Constitution is made the judge of the elections, returns, and 'nullifications of its own meml>ers. No other department can interfere with it. Its decision includes ail others. The only correction when error is committed consists in the responsibility of the members to the people. But it Is believed by the undersigned to be the clear duty of each House to admit any Senator or Representative who has been elected according to the constitutional laws of the State, and who is able and willing to subscribe to the ! oath rri| i i red by constitutional law.

TUB Ql'KSTlOV OK KXPKDIKXCT DISCM'SSKD. It is conceded by the majority that "it > 'v< iul<l undoubtedly be competcut for Ton"1*. ? to waive all formalities and to admit i, federate States at once, trusting tl>( '^e atKi experience would set all that time^. jt js ?ot, therefore, owing things right. * .titutional power that it to a want of co'lHjfo' h<cause such States is not done. It is ikR0** .miblicau forms of arc not States with must there - governuicnt. The cxclustervoy.tv or ex. for.? rc>t <iii considerations of safety, pediency aloye. The lirst, that we we have already considered, and^ST * think, proved it to be without foundation. Is there any ground for the latter, expediency ? We think not. Uu the contrary, in our judgment, their admission is called for by the clearest expediency. Those States include a territorial area of ?50,imio square miles, an area larger than that ni rive of the leaditig nations of Europe. They have a coast line of three thousand miles, with an internal water line, including the Mississippi, of about 3t;,000 miles. Their agricultural products in lt?50 were about $360,000,000 in value, and their population y,fjt>4,6;>6. Their staple productions are of immenNe and growing importance, and arc almo*t peculiar to that region. That the north is deeply interested in having such a country and people restored to all the rights and privileges that the Constitution affords, no sane man, not blinded by mere party considerations, or not a victim of disordering prejudice, can lot a moment doubt. Such a restoration is also neces.sary to the peace of the country. Ii is not ouly important but vital t ? the potential wealth of which tliat section of tiie country is capable of, that cannot otherwise be fully developed. Kvery hour of illegal jwlitical restraint, ??very hour the possession of the rights the Constitution gives is denied, is not only in a political, but a material sense, of great injury to the north as well as to the south. The ? mthern planter works for his north ern brethren an well as for himself, llis labors heretofore inured as much, if n >t more, to their advantage than to his. Whilst haimony in the pa*t between the sections gave to the whole a prosperity, a power, and a renown of which every citizen had reason to be proud, the restoration of such harmony will immeasurably increase them all. Can it, will it, be restored as long as the south is kept in political and dishouoring bondage f And can it not, will it not, 1m; restored by an opposite policy? by admitting her to all the rights of the Constitution, and by dealing with her citj/.ens as equals and as brothers, not as infer lorsaud enemies/ Such a course a* this will, we are certain, soou be seen to bind them 1 heart ami soul to the Union, and inspire them with confidence in its government, by making them feel that all enmity is forgotten, and that justice is being doue to them. The result of such a policy, wo be. I lieve, will at once make us in very trnth l one people* as happy, as prosperous, and as itowerful as ever existed in the tide of time ; wliilst its opjKisite cannot fail to keep us divided, injuriously affect the particular and general welfare of e\ti2ens and government, and, if long persisted in, result in danger to the nation. In the words of an eminent British Whig statesman, now no more : 44 A free constitution hnd large exclusion^ from its benefits cannot subsist together ; the constitution will destroy them, or they will destroy the cou. stitution." It if hoped that, heeding the warning, we will guard against the peril by removing tlie cause** EXKCt'TtVB MEAStRBS HAWEO OVE? ? VIVI>I< CATIOV or ME. JOMXSOSi? coxti-tsiox. The undersigned have not thought it ne- ? ctstary to examine into the legality of the measures adopted either by the late oc the present President for the restoration of ' the southern States. It Is sutBclent ior their purpose to say, that if those ^of Frestdent Johnson were not justified by the Constitution, the same may at to*** be ?aid of those of his predecessor. We deem such an examination to be ^uu. necessary, because, however It uilgnt result, the people of the several Slates who possessed, as we hav? befbrs sakMheexelusive right to deekio for theowelvea wUat wn Jftutions tljey should ado*, have adopted those under which they respectively Hve. The motives of neither ! ) 'resident, however, whether the ?eai i?ures are legal or not, are HnMe Is fen. i?ure. The sol* object of etch WU |c fleet a comploty aad etrly