The Daily Dispatch: December 25, 1865., [Electronic resource]

The speech of Mr. Raymond, a part of which we published on Saturday, has, no doubt, been read with interest by every person who feels any anxiety with regard to the present condition of public affairs. It takes the ground held by the whole Union party throughout the war, with the exception of Thad. Stevens and a few followers, who were then, and continue to be now, quite as good Secessionists as Jefferson Davis or any member of his Cabinet. If the promises of Mr. Raymond be sound, his conclusions are certainly correct. He differs from Thad. Stevens in both, precisely as, during the war, any Union man would have differed from any Secessionist.

Mr. Stevens contends that these States are not in the Union--that they are territories, as New Mexico is a territory — that, as such, Congress has a right to treat them, being, as such, subject to the discipline and tutelage of Congress. In this condition of affairs it is his desire to have the Southern States in a state of pupilage for an indefinite time — the shortest period he speaks of is thirty years. General objects are to be accomplished by the recommended legislation. In the first place, the South, being conquered territory, is to be turned into a vast field of plunder, from which Stevens himself is to have the value of his iron mills repaid one hundred fold, and all his followers are to grow rich. As to the fate that is to await the white race, we are told by him to look at the massacre and deportation of the inhabitants of Latium by the Romans — with the exception of the massacre of Melos by the Athenians — the most atrocious crime in all ancient history, perpetrated, too, five hundred years before the birth of Christ. They are to be robbed of everything by repeated spoliations and confiscations. Next, they must be kept out of the Union for thirty years, and degraded by mixture and association with the negroes until they become no better than the negroes. Above all things — they must be kept out of the Union, in order that the Republicans may retain their party power.

Such is the programme and such the avowed object of Thad. Stevens. If these States are out of the Union, his deductions are logical enough, Thad, says they are, and in this he is consistent; for he maintained the same thing during the war. If they are out, the question is, how did they get out, for they certainly were in at one time. It must have been by Secession; and this, we believe, is a part of Thad's creed. If the States went out by secession, the war was against an independent power, and Jefferson Davis and his compeers, so far from being traitors, and liable to be tried and execute as such, are patriots, deserving the applause of mankind. Yet Thad. Stevens and his followers are continually howling for the blood of Jeff. Davis, and are endeavoring so to alter the law as to insure his conviction, whether proved guilty or not. They are continually crying out for confiscation — less than the whole South will not satisfy them. Yet the Southern people, if the doctrine of Thad. Stevens be true, deserve reward, not punishment, for the valor and constancy with which they defended their native land.

Admitting that the South is conquered territory, did any modern nation ever confiscate the lands of another nation after having conquered it? Did even Katherine, of Russia, do it? England, we know, served Scotland in that way, and even executed Wallace for treason. But it was after Edward had made Baliol swear fealty to him by a gross fraud and deception. Napoleon, we believe, did the same thing in Spain. But it was after he had induced old Charles to surrender the crown into his hands. Both these monarchs confiscated, under pretence of treason. Confiscation is, indeed, the peculiar punishment of treason; and if the South has committed no treason — as it has not, upon the Stevens theory — how can it be punished for it? Only upon the theory of President Johnson--that the Union was never dissolved — can a case of treason be made out.