friends may be the objects of sympathy, of honor, of reward; but
in the work of reconstruction the interest and safety of the great body
of loyal citizens of the United States, of the persons who have bought
the territory at such a terrible price, are to be primarily consulted.
And not simply because such a course is expedient, but because the
Southern Unionists can advance no valid claim to be the political
societies which were recognized by the Federal constitution as States
before the Rebellion. If they were, they might proceed at once to assume
the powers of the States, without any authority from Washington, and
without calling any convention to form a _new_ constitution. If, on the
breaking out of the Rebellion, they had rallied in defence of the old
constitutions within State limits, preserved the organization of the
States in all departments, raised and equipped armies, and conducted a
war against the Confederates as traitors to their respective States as
well as to the United States, they might present some claims to be
considered the States; but this they did not do, and they were not
powerful enough to do it. The large proportion of them were compelled to
form a part of the Rebel power.

And this brings us directly to the heart of the matter. It is asserted
that the Acts of Secession, being unconstitutional, were inoperative and
void. But they were passed by the people of the several States which
seceded, and the persons and property of the whole people were
indiscriminately employed in making them effective. The States held by
Rebel armies were Rebel States. All the population were necessarily, in
the view of the Federal government, Rebel enemies. Consequently the
territory of the States was as "void" of citizens of the United States
as the Acts of Secession were "void." The only things left, then, were
the inoperative ideas of States.

Again, to put the argument in another form, it is asserted, that, though
the people of a State may commit treason, the State itself remains
unaffected by the crime. A distinction is here made between a State and
the people who constitute it,--between the State and the persons who
create its constitution and organize its government. The State
constitution which existed while it was a State, in the Federal meaning
of the word, was destroyed in an essential part by the same authority
which created it, namely, a convention of the people of the State; and
yet it is said that the