Admission of Southern Representatives.
This, which is the absorbing topic of conversation, discussion, and even of strife, in
Washington city, continues to occupy the attention of newspapers every where and of their correspondents in that city.
We cull from papers of opposite political bearings the speculations which are indulged by the several parties.
The Baltimore
Sun's Washington correspondence says:
‘
Washington, December 10.--The Republicans are in a very anxious condition.
Men of conservative and radical views are seen much in conference, and the result, doubtless, will be a letting down gradually from the Colfax-
Stevens-
Sumner platform towards that of the
President.
In no other way can the Republican party be kept together.
I believe
Horace Greeley and
Colonel Forncy both are working to this end.
’
Stevens is pushed hard by the Radicals for the chairmanship of the leading House committee, and the
Speaker may yield.
Mr. Kasson is antagonizing
Mr. Raymond for the chairmanship of the foreign affairs committee.
Speaker Colfax keeps his own counsels and consults with but few, if any, members as to the construction of the standing committees.
The subject is one of much interest to those having legitimate business before the
House, and also to an energetic class of men here known as the lobby.
To-morrow, if there is a quorum of members present, the
House standing committees will be named.
It is said that
Thaddeus Stevens is chairman of the ways and means;
Mr. Morrill, of
Vermont, chairman of the committee on appropriations, and
General Butler chairman of the committee on foreign relations.
There is a great and just indignation over
Steven's appointment, and a pressure may change it.
The Republicans, it is said, do not intend to quarrel with the
President, but that they will take their own time about admitting the
Southern members, except those from
Tennessee.
They will yield on this point, it is represented, out of deference to the
Executive, and especially for the reason that his son-in-law is one of the
Senators.
Mr. Greeley says in his paper:
‘
The President and the overwhelming majority of Congress are in intimate and friendly communication, and no arts will suffice to embitter or alienate them.
They will frequently consult and compare views; they will respect each other's rights and convictions; they will consider well the many grounds of cordial agreement, the few points of difference, and will labor to emphasize the former and remove the latter.
Time and daily intercourse will serve to clear up misapprehensions, to strengthen the ties that unite them, and heighten the mutual desire to act in concert, so far as worthily may be, and to remove impediments to concurrent action, which the arts of mutual adversaries have tended to aggravate.
It is already certain that both
President and Congress will earnestly endeavor to act in concert; and, in such matters, the will suggests and smoothes the way. The very cordial and hearty approval generally accorded to the
President's message proves that the obstacles to such a concurrence are neither so many nor so formidable as the common adversaries of
President and Congress have loudly, confidently, anticipated.
’
And the
National Intelligencer of yesterday declares by authority:
‘
We feel able to say with confidence that
Mr. Horace Greeley, who is now in this city, has expressed himself substantially in accord with the
President in his reconstruction policy as announced in his message, and earnestly deprecates any division of the majority of Congress.
’
The
Intelligencer, in addition to the gratifying announcement above published in reference to
Mr. Greeley, furnishes us with the following remarks addressed to Congress:
‘
The South, now full of vitality, and alive in activity, yielding generally to the sway of civil law, expectant and hopeful, performing all its national functions except only that of representation in Congress, teeming with every proof of loyalty which the most exacting could have anticipated so soon after such a war,--this South, thus governed and fostered by the policy of the
President, under
Radical treatment, would have been--
what? Under the Radical theory this South would have been kept down until now by the force of arms — by the military hand of the
President.
Its sons and daughters would have been held as a people subjected by war under the stern soldier, in trembling doubt and suspense about the future, without sympathy or well-grounded hope, looking on the old flag as aliens and exiles, almost as slaves, as the symbol of a power all pitiless toward them and their descendants, and from whom, at most, they might hope to be permitted to drink the clip of humiliation and degradation.
This would have been the
South of
to-day, as it would have greeted Congress under the policy of the "Union" Radicals, who were amusing themselves with fanatical theories or party tricks, while an American President toiled day and night to bring the
Union to the grand point which it has reached.
For our own part, we will not willingly believe that Congress can be made to assume a position so reactionary and discordant.
There is but one class in the nation who demand extremes beyond those exacted by the
President: they are those who insist that negro suffrage shall be thrust upon the
South by the usurping hand of the
Federal power.
It remains to be seen whether or not
this is all the hope for restoration that lies in the bottom of the Pandora-like box that Radicalism offers to the country.
’
