Chapter XIX

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON RECONSTRUCTION.

An important State Paper -- Work of the Committee --
Difficulty of obtaining information -- Theory of the
President -- Taxation and Representation -- Disposition and
doings of the Southern People -- Conclusion of the Committee
-- Practical Recommendations.

On the 8th of June, the day on which the constitutional amendment passed the Senate, the report of the joint Committee on Reconstruction was presented to Congress. This important State paper had been looked for with great interest and no little anxiety by the people in all parts of the country. It was drawn up with marked ability, and was destined to have a most important bearing upon public opinion in reference to the great subject which, in all its bearings, it brought to the view of Congress and the country.

The committee having had unrivalled opportunities for obtaining information, their conclusions commanded the respect of those who differed from them, and obtained the almost unanimous approval of the party which carried the war to a successful close.

Referring to the nature of the work which was required of them, the committee said:

"Such an investigation, covering so large an extent of
territory, and involving so many important considerations,
must necessarily require no trifling labor, and consume a
very considerable amount of time. It must embrace the
condition in which those States were left at the close of
the war; the measures which have been taken toward the
reörganization of civil government, and the disposition of
the people toward the United States--in a word, their
fitness to take an active part in the administration of
national affairs."

The first step to be taken by the committee, that of obtaining required information, and the difficulties attending it, were thus set forth:

"A call was made on the President for the information in his
possession as to what had been done, in order that Congress
might judge for itself as to the grounds of belief expressed
by him in the fitness of States recently in rebellion to
participate fully in the conduct of national affairs. This
information was not immediately communicated. When the
response was finally made, some six weeks after your
committee had been in actual session, it was found that the
evidence upon which the President seemed to have based his
suggestions was incomplete and unsatisfactory. Authenticated
copies of the constitutions and ordinances adopted by the
conventions in three of the States had been submitted;
extracts from newspapers furnished scanty information as to
the action of one other State, and nothing appears to have
been communicated as to the remainder. There was no evidence
of the loyalty of those who participated in these
conventions, and in one State alone was any proposition made
to submit the action of the convention to the final judgment
of the people.

"Failing to obtain the desired information, and left to
grope for light wherever it might be found, your committee
did not deem it either advisable or safe to adopt, without
further examination, the suggestions of the President, more
especially as he had not deemed it expedient to remove the
military force, to suspend martial law, or to restore the
writ of habeas corpus, but still thought it necessary to
exercise over the people of the rebellious States his
military power and jurisdiction. This conclusion derived
greater force from the fact, undisputed, that in all those
States, except Tennessee, and, perhaps, Arkansas, the
elections which were held for State officers and members of
Congress had resulted almost universally in the defeat of
candidates who had been true to the Union, and in the
election of notorious and unpardoned rebels--men who could
not take the prescribed oath of office, and who made no
secret of their hostility to the Government and the people
of the United States.

"Under these circumstances, any thing like hasty action
would have been as dangerous as it was obviously unwise. It
appeared to your committee that but one course remained,
viz.: to investigate carefully and thoroughly the state of
feeling and opinion existing among the people of these
States; to ascertain how far their pretended loyalty could
be relied upon, and thence to infer whether it would be safe
to admit them at once to a full participation in the
Government they had fought for four years to destroy. It was
an equally important inquiry whether their restoration to
their former relations with the United States should only be
granted upon certain conditions and guarantees, which would
effectually secure the nation against a recurrence of evils
so disastrous as those from which it had escaped at so
enormous a sacrifice."

The theory of the President, and those who demanded the immediate admission of Southern Senators and Representatives, was stated in the report to amount to this:

"That, inasmuch as the lately insurgent States had no legal
right to separate themselves from the Union, they still
retain their positions as States, and, consequently, the
people thereof have a right to immediate representation in
Congress, without the imposition of any conditions whatever;
and, further, that until such admission, Congress has no
right to tax them for the support of the Government. It has
even been contended that, until such admission, all
legislation affecting their interests is, if not
unconstitutional, at least unjustifiable and oppressive.

"It is moreover contended that, from the moment when
rebellion lays down its arms, and actual hostilities cease,
all political rights of rebellious communities are at once
restored; that because the people of a State of the Union
were once an organized community within the Union, they
necessarily so remain, and their right to be represented in
Congress at any and all times, and to participate in the
government of the country under all circumstances, admits of
neither question nor dispute. If this is indeed true, then
is the Government of the United States powerless for its own
protection, and flagrant rebellion, carried to the extreme
of civil war, is a pastime which any State may play at, not
only certain that it can lose nothing, in any event, but may
be the gainer by defeat. If rebellion succeeds, it
accomplishes its purpose and destroys the Government. If it
fails, the war has been barren of results, and the battle
may be fought out in the legislative halls of the country.
Treason defeated in the field has only to take possession of
Congress and the Cabinet."

The committee in this report asserted:

"It is more than idle, it is a mockery to contend that a
people who have thrown off their allegiance, destroyed the
local government which bound their States to the Union as
members thereof, defied its authority, refused to execute
its laws, and abrogated every provision which gave them
political rights within the Union, still retain through all
the perfect and entire right to resume at their own will and
pleasure all their privileges within the Union, and
especially to participate in its government and control the
conduct of its affairs. To admit such a principle for one
moment would be to declare that treason is always master and
loyalty a blunder."

To a favorite argument of the advocates of immediate restoration of the rebel States, the report presented the following reply:

"That taxation should be only with the consent of the
people, through their own representatives, is a cardinal
principle of all free governments; but it is not true that
taxation and representation must go together under all
circumstances and at every moment of time. The people of the
District of Columbia and of the Territories are taxed,
although not represented in Congress. If it be true that the
people of the so-called Confederate States have no right to
throw off the authority of the United States, it is equally
true that they are bound at all times to share the burdens
of Government. They can not, either legally or equitably,
refuse to bear their just proportion of these burdens by
voluntarily abdicating their rights and privileges as States
of the Union, and refusing to be represented in the councils
of the nation, much less by rebellion against national
authority and levying war. To hold that by so doing they
could escape taxation, would be to offer a premium for
insurrection--to reward instead of punishing treason."

Upon the important subject of representation, which had occupied much of the attention of the committee and much of the time of Congress, the report held the following words:

"The increase of representation, necessarily resulting from
the abolition of slavery, was considered the most important
element in the questions arising out of the changed
condition of affairs, and the necessity for some fundamental
action in this regard seemed imperative. It appeared to your
committee that the rights of these persons, by whom the
basis of representation had been thus increased, should be
recognized by the General Government. While slaves they were
not considered as having any rights, civil or political. It
did not seem just or proper that all the political
advantages derived from their becoming free should be
confined to their former masters, who had fought against the
Union, and withheld from themselves, who had always been
loyal. Slavery, by building up a ruling and dominant class,
had produced a spirit of oligarchy adverse to republican
institutions, which finally inaugurated civil war. The
tendency of continuing the domination of such a class, by
leaving it in the exclusive possession of political power,
would be to encourage the same spirit and lead to a similar
result. Doubts were entertained whether Congress had power,
even under the amended Constitution, to prescribe the
qualifications of voters in a State, or could act directly
on the subject. It was doubtful in the opinion of your
committee whether the States would consent to surrender a
power they had always exercised, and to which they were
attached. As the best, not the only method of surmounting
all difficulty, and as eminently just and proper in itself,
your committee comes to the conclusion that political power
should be possessed in all the States exactly in proportion
as the right of suffrage should be granted without
distinction of color or race. This, it was thought, would
leave the whole question with the people of each State,
holding out to all the advantages of increased political
power as an inducement to allow all to participate in its
exercise. Such a proposition would be in its nature gentle
and persuasive, and would tend, it was hoped, at no distant
day, to an equal participation of all, without distinction,
in all the rights and privileges of citizenship, thus
affording a full and adequate protection to all classes of
citizens, since we would have, through the ballot-box, the
power of self-protection.

"Holding these views, your committee prepared an amendment
to the Constitution to carry out this idea, and submitted
the same to Congress. Unfortunately, as we think, it did not
receive the necessary constitutional support in the Senate,
and, therefore, could not be proposed for adoption by the
States. The principle involved in that amendment is,
however, believed to be sound, and your committee have again
proposed it in another form, hoping that it may receive the
approbation of Congress."

The action of the people of the insurrectionary States, and their responses to the President's appeals, as showing their degree of preparation for immediate admission into Congress, was thus set forth in the report:

"So far as the disposition of the people of the
insurrectionary States and the probability of their adopting
measures conforming to the changed condition of affairs can
be inferred, from the papers submitted by the President as
the basis of his action, the prospects are far from
encouraging. It appears quite clear that the anti-slavery
amendments, both to the State and Federal Constitutions,
were adopted with reluctance by the bodies which did adopt
them; and in some States they have been either passed by in
silence or rejected. The language of all the provisions and
ordinances of the States on the subject amounts to nothing
more than an unwilling admission of an unwelcome truth. As
to the ordinance of secession, it is in some cases declared
'null and void,' and in others simply 'repealed,' and in no
case is a refutation of this deadly heresy considered worthy
of a place in the new constitutions.

"If, as the President assumes, these insurrectionary States
were, at the close of the war, wholly without State
governments, it would seem that before being admitted to
participate in the direction of public affairs, such
governments should be regularly organized. Long usage has
established, and numerous statutes have pointed out, the
mode in which this should be done. A convention to frame a
form of government should be assembled under competent
authority. Ordinarily this authority emanates from Congress;
but under the peculiar circumstances, your committee is not
disposed to criticise the President's action in assuming the
power exercised by him in this regard.

"The convention, when assembled, should frame a constitution
of government, which should be submitted to the people for
adoption. If adopted, a Legislature should be convened to
pass the laws necessary to carry it into effect. When a
State thus organized claims representation in Congress, the
election of Representatives should be provided for by law,
in accordance with the laws of Congress regulating
representation, and the proof, that the action taken has
been in conformity to law, should be submitted to Congress.

"In no case have these essential preliminary steps been
taken. The conventions assembled seem to have assumed that
the Constitution which had been repudiated and overthrown,
was still in existence, and operative to constitute the
States members of the Union, and to have contented
themselves with such amendments as they were informed were
requisite in order to insure their return to an immediate
participation in the Government of the United States. And
without waiting to ascertain whether the people they
represented would adopt even the proposed amendments, they
at once called elections of Representatives to Congress in
nearly all instances before an Executive had been chosen to
issue certificates of election under the State laws, and
such elections as were held were ordered by the conventions.
In one instance, at least, the writs of election were signed
by the provisional governor. Glaring irregularities and
unwarranted assumptions of power are manifest in several
cases, particularly in South Carolina, where the convention,
although disbanded by the provisional governor on the ground
that it was a revolutionary body, assumed to district the
State."

The report thus sets forth the conduct naturally expected of the Southern people, as contrasted with their actual doings:

"They should exhibit in their acts something more than
unwilling submission to an unavoidable necessity--a feeling,
if not cheerful, certainly not offensive and defiant, and
should evince an entire repudiation of all hostility to the
General Government by an acceptance of such just and
favorable conditions as that Government should think the
public safety demands. Has this been done? Let us look at
the facts shown by the evidence taken by the committee.
Hardly had the war closed before the people of these
insurrectionary States come forward and hastily claim as a
right the privilege of participating at once in that
Government which they had for four years been fighting to
overthrow.

"Allowed and encouraged by the Executive to organize State
governments, they at once place in power leading rebels,
unrepentant and unpardoned, excluding with contempt those
who had manifested an attachment to the Union, and
preferring, in many instances, those who had rendered
themselves the most obnoxious. In the face of the law
requiring an oath which would necessarily exclude all such
men from Federal office, they elect, with very few
exceptions, as Senators and Representatives in Congress, men
who had actively participated in the rebellion, insultingly
denouncing the law as unconstitutional.

"It is only necessary to instance the election to the Senate
of the late Vice President of the Confederacy--a man who,
against his own declared convictions, had lent all the
weight of his acknowledged ability and of his influence as a
most prominent public man to the cause of the rebellion, and
who, unpardoned rebel as he is, with that oath staring him
in the face, had the assurance to lay his credentials on the
table of the Senate. Other rebels of scarcely less note or
notoriety were selected from other quarters. Professing no
repentance, glorying apparently in the crime they had
committed, avowing still, as the uncontradicted testimony of
Mr. Stephens and many others proves, an adherence to the
pernicious doctrines of secession, and declaring that they
yielded only to necessity, they insist with unanimous voice
upon their rights as States, and proclaim they will submit
to no conditions whatever preliminary to their resumption of
power under that Constitution which they still claim the
right to repudiate."

Finally the report thus presented the "conclusion of the committee:"

"That the so-called Confederate States are not at present
entitled to representation in the Congress of the United
States; that before allowing such representation, adequate
security for future peace and safety should be required;
that this can only be found in such changes of the organic
law as shall determine the civil rights and privileges of
all citizens in all parts of the republic, shall place
representation on an equitable basis, shall fix a stigma
upon treason, and protect the loyal people against future
claims for the expenses incurred in support of rebellion and
for manumitted slaves, together with an express grant of
power in Congress to enforce these provisions. To this end
they have offered a joint resolution for amending the
Constitution of the United States, and two several bills
designed to carry the same into effect."

The passage of the Constitutional Amendment by more than the necessary majority has been related. One of the bills to which reference is made in the above report--declaring certain officials of the so-called Confederate States ineligible to any office under the Government of the United States--was placed in the amendment in lieu of the disfranchising clause. The other bill provided for "the restoration of the States lately in insurrection to their full rights" so soon as they should have ratified the proposed amendment. This bill was defeated in the House by a vote of 75 to 48. Congress thus refused to pledge itself in advance to make the amendment the sole test of the reädmission of rebel States. Congress, however, clearly indicated a disposition to restore those States "at the earliest day consistent with the future peace and safety of the Union." The report and doings of the Committee of Fifteen, although by many impatiently criticised as dilatory, resulted, before the end of the first session of the Thirty-ninth Congress, in the reconstruction of one of the States lately in rebellion.