The unanimous appeal of the Southern Loyalists at Philadelphia, representing the whole ten unreconstructed States, speaks with a pathos that ought to melt all hearts:

"We declare," say they, "that there can be no security for us or our children—there can be no safety for the country against the fell spirit of slavery now organized in the form of serfdom-unless the Government, by national authority, shall confer on every citizen in the States we represent the American birthright of impartial suffrage and equality before the law. This is the one allsufficient remedy."

Are not these words solemn, noble, and just? Do not they far outshine the tarnished proclamation of the National Committee? Let the Republican party ask itself one thoughtful question: Ought we to reconstruct the ten remaining States so as to protect, or so as to destroy, the lives, property, and happiness of their loyal people? But if these ten States are to be reconstructed in the interest of loyalty, instead of treason, then let the unanimous demand of the Southern loyalists take the place of the less worthy appeal of the National Committee. If, after our pleasant fortune of a week's sojourn at Philadelphia with the noble representatives of the ten unreconstructed States, during which we learned their purposes and gauged their hearts, we had come home only to strike hands with the policy of the National Committee policy which the Southern loyalists came to the North to plead against as totally inadequate to their needs — we should account ourselves little less than treacherous to the best-tried and most-suffering friends of the Republic.

We say nothing in criticism of the good men who have

a

signed the National Committee's address. Some of these signers we honor and revere. How these lovers of justice can assent to such a policy of compromise is undoubtedly excused to their own minds, if not to ours. Horace Greeley gave to this address his revision and his name; but not his heart. His heart is hungry for justice, and craves more than the Committee's husk. Lieut.-Gov. Claflin of Massachusetts signed it; but his honored name is almost a synonym for Equal Rights. It is with heaviness of spirit that we find so many clear-sighted men holding back half their thoughts at a time when the country so urgently needs to hear every voice that can speak for Impartial Suffrage. Will the Republican party be injured by plain speech? No. It will be helped. But, whether helped or hindered, are we to give up to party what was meant for mankind? "Duties are ours,"

said Phillip Henry, "results are God's." The duty of the Republican party is to reject the pledge made by the National Committee; and the result may be safely left to that Great Disposer "who doeth all things well." O, ye of little faith! Never were thirsty pilgrims so willing to be led to a fountain of living waters, as the loyal party of this nation are now willing to be led to the safe ground of Impartial Justice. "Speak to the children of Israel, that they go forward."

SEPTEMBER 27, 1866.

THE FIRST AND THE SECOND REVO

LUTION.

HAVE been walking to-day over the battleground of Lexington-the sacred field where our fathers “fired the shot heard round the world." Chipped with frosts and gnawed by time, a piece of perishing granite repeats to the pilgrim their imperishable names. "The blood of these martyrs," says the graven legend, "was the cenient of the Union of these States." So thought the fathers who erected this monument in 1799. But this cement of blood did not prove strong enough to keep the States together. They flew asunder-breaking the sanguinary bonds. Henceforth let it be remembered that the cement of the American Union must be something more than the blood which has been shed in its defence. The only cement which can hold the Union together in the future is a vital principle-not buried dust. If men are not animated by justice to the living, they will not be restrained by reverence for the dead. The dead of the late war are as precious a legacy as were the dead of the Revolution. But unless the great cause for which our fresh army of martyrs died shall be placed beyond peril, on the safe foundation of impartial justice, the blood of the heroes of two wars for liberty will unite in crying from the ground.

Like the rebuilding of Jerusalem, this nation is relay

ing its foundations. For this sublime task, Providence has given it choice either of the sand or the rock. While yet the nation was shaken of War, it chose the rock. But now that Peace has quieted the tumult, the Government is crumbling the rock into sand.

The nation is informed from Washington that President Johnson's Administration has no power to impose Impartial Suffrage on the South, because it has no power to impose the same on the North. Is there then no difference between the relation of the Federal Government toward States that have been loyal, and toward States that have been rebel? Look at it. Has the President, for instance, a right to appoint a Provisional Governor for Connecticut? No. But he himself was appointed a Provisional Goveruor for Tennessee. Has he a right to dictate what Connecticut shall do with her State debt? No. But he commanded his premier to say that every rebel State should repudiate its rebel debt. Has he a right to demand that Connecticut shall ratify the prohibitory Amendment? No. But he gave notice to all the South that it must ratify the same amendment. Is it not effrontery, therefore, is it not mockery, is it not nonsense, to say that he is estopped from propounding suffrage as a condition of reconstruction, because, in order to fix it upon the South, he must at the same time fix it upon the North? If the Government can say to the conquered States, "Nullify your ordinances of secession, repudiate your rebel debt, abolish slavery, ratify the prohibitory amendment"-if it can say all this (and it has said all this), then it can also say, in the same breath, and with the same emphasis, "Give the negro soldier his justlyearned franchise." As the Government is exercising the

right to fix every other pre-requisite of reconstruction except Equal Suffrage, why does it not fix this also? Is the occasion not yet ripe? When are we to reach the negro, if not now? If the present golden opportunity be squandered, shall Providence make haste to lavish upon us another? A few years ago slavery existed in the Southern States, and the Federal Government had no right to interfere. Even radical Abolitionists recognized the incompetency of Congress to break the slave's chain. War gave the right to emancipate. Except for the changed relations of the slave States by the rebellion, no such Federal authority would have existed. When the rebellious States shall have regained their former status in the Union, the Federal Government will have no more authority over them than it now has over New England or the West. Instead of seeing the Government dictating to the South, we shall then see the South dictating to the Government. If we omit to secure justice to the negro now, it will be too late to secure it byand-by.

*

*

*

*

*

How will the South treat the free negro? Will it sell him at auction? No. Will it sunder his family? No. Will it hunt him with bloodhounds? No. We answer thus positively, because even Andrew Johnson said to the black regiment, "You are henceforth to enjoy your freedom." But what is the freedom which they are to enjoy? Its sum and substance is (by presidential interpretation) a man's right to work all the week, and to sue for his wages on Saturday night; and, as the Raven said, only this and nothing more." This freedom-the same which the Austrian has, and groans under; the same which the Hungarian has, and weeps over; the same

66