In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Representative Thaddeus Stevens Speech on Reconstruction, December 18, 1865 The Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, 72–75 (1865) “As these fallen rebels cannot at their option reenter the heaven which they have disturbed, the garden of Eden which they have deserted, and flaming swords are set at the gates to secure their exclusion, it becomes important to the welfare of the nation to inquire when the doors shall be reopened for their admission,” thundered Pennsylvania Representative Thaddeus Stevens on the issue of Reconstruction. In this speech, Stevens analyzes the two fundamental problems of Reconstruction: the problem of reconstructing loyal states and the problem of reconstructing southern race relations . Stevens understood that these problems were intertwined and inseparable. He also believed that because of the removal of slavery, his era held the promise of fulfilling the noble principles of equality of all men (given the historical context, not yet all women or persons) as stated in the Declaration of Independence. At just that time, the nation had the opportunity to truly become “a more perfect union,” as stated in the preamble of the 1787 Constitution. But, Stevens the realist understood that race and race consciousness constituted a problem. Cries by southerners and Copperheads (northerners and Border States men with southern, anti-black sentiments ) that the federal government was “a white man’s government ” would derail progress toward the nation’s reconstruction and its future greatness. As Stevens eloquently put the issue: “Our fathers repudiated the whole doctrine of the legal superiority of families or races, and proclaimed the equality of men before the law. Upon that they created a revolution and built the Republic. They were prevented by slavery from perfecting the superstructure whose foundation they had thus broadly laid. For the sake of the Union they consented to wait, but never relinquished the idea of its final completion. The time to which they looked forward with anxiety has come. It is our duty to complete their work.” This speech Documentary History of the American Civil War Era 150 stands out not because Stevens foresaw the details of Reconstruction , but because he grasped the almost intractable problem of race and public policy at issue in Reconstruction. Mr. stevens. A candid examination of the power and proper principles of reconstruction can be offensive to no one, and may possibly be profitable by exciting inquiry. One of the suggestions of the message which we are now considering has special reference to this. Perhaps it is the principle most interesting to the people at this time. The President assumes, what no one doubts, that the late rebel States have lost their constitutional relations to the Union, and are incapable of representation in Congress, except by permission of the Government. It matters but little, with this admission, whether you call them States out of the Union, and now conquered territories, or assert that because the Constitution forbids them to do what they did do, that they are therefore only dead as to all national and political action, and will remain so until the Government shall breathe into them the breath of life anew and permit them to occupy their former position. In other words, that they are not out of the Union, but are only dead carcasses lying within the Union. In either case, it is very plain that it requires the action of Congress to enable them to form a State government and send representatives to Congress. Nobody, I believe, pretends that with their old constitutions and frames of government they can be permitted to claim their old rights under the Constitution. They have torn their constitutional States into atoms, and built on their foundations fabrics of a totally different character. Dead men cannot raise themselves. Dead States cannot restore their own existence “as it was.” Whose especial duty is it to do it? In whom does the Constitution place the power? Not in the judicial branch of Government, for it only adjudicates and does not prescribe laws. Not in the Executive, for he only executes and cannot make laws. Not in the Commander-in-Chief of the armies, for he can only hold them under military rule until the sovereign legislative power of the conqueror shall give them law. There is fortunately no difficulty in solving the question. There are two provisions in the Constitution, under one of which the case must fall. The fourth article says: “New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union.” In my judgment this...

Share