States appear to be destructible. From the Pillars of Hercules, all around the shores of the Mediterranean Sea—where dwelt the people to whom God gave laws amidst the thunders of Horeb and others, whence came language and most of our civilization and religion—are found the ashes of dead empires.
The Confederate States must have been out of the Union, unless we admit that the English language is not expressive enough to clearly describe events. To me the act of Congress passed February 17, 1870, to "admit the State of Mississippi," the proclamations to "come back,"[52] to "restore the State," etc., are but a few of the proofs that we were out of the Union; and the declaration of war, the blockade, belligerent rights show that the Confederate States were independent. We were "rebels" (so called) designedly to enable the United States to escape paying Confederate bonds held by foreign powers, and to settle other international questions with them. We were in the Union or out of the Union, as the exigency of the occasion required.
And this reminds me of an incident that occurred in the section room at the United States Military Academy in 1841. Capt. J. A. Thomas was assistant professor of ethics. The subject: "The Constitution of the United States." He there said: "Gentlemen, there are latent powers in this Constitution that will be found to meet every emergency that may arise." And now, behold, since then! "The higher law," "the extra constitutional measures," "the confiscation of property," "greenbacks a legal tender," etc., the wealth of the nation made exempt from taxation by the supreme court, and the trusts, etc. Truly we were a conquered nation, because the United States had to resort to all the constitutional requirements of foreign warfare.
In the platform accepted by Mr. Lincoln is this resolution: "Resolved, That we maintain inviolate the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions, according to its own judgment exclusively." And in his inaugural he said: "I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with slavery in any of the slaveholding States of the Union."
Then Congress passed, February 11, 1861, the following: "Resolved, That neither Congress, nor the people, nor the government of the nonslaveholding States have the right to legislate upon or interfere with slavery in any of the slaveholding States of the Union."
These resolutions and promises were brushed aside like reeds in the path of conquest. Their armies marched on without any check by the act of habeas corpus, as it was suspended by article 2 in the President's proclamation of September 22, 1862, which reads: "That the writ of habeas corpus is suspended in regard to all persons arrested, or who are now or hereafter during the rebellion shall be imprisoned in any fort, camp, arsenal, military prison, or other place of confinement by any military authority or by sentence of any court-martial or military commission."
I remember a story on the Committee of the French Academy appointed to prepare the "Academy Dictionary." Their definition of a crab was "a small, red fish which walks backward." "Gentlemen," said Cuvier, "your definition would be perfect, only for three exceptions: The crab is not a fish, it is not red, and it does not walk backward."
So, if the Union was indissoluble, and the States were indestructible, how could they be reconstructed and readmitted? It is as erroneous as the definition of the crab.
It may be said, almost literally, that the administration for the expansion of war power deposited the Constitution in the State Department for the use of the supreme court after the war. They now ordained a despotic policy as being more expedient to run the government, because it could be changed, like a vane on a house top, according to the breath of public opinion or the exigency of the times. To confine their troops to the duty of destroying the regular Confederate forces, according to the usages of civilized war, had been tried in vain; but once freed from the restraints of the Constitution and modern rules of war, the work of desolation commenced to the extent that a ruthless general reported that a crow would have to carry its provisions if it crossed the valley he had laid waste. His example was excelled by others. The truth is that if the North had not disregarded the Constitution, IT, would have ruined them. It was a government of opportunism.
As regards reconstruction (so called), I will only observe that a conquered people are obliged to accept such terms as the conqueror offers.