all others, shall reestablish a state government which shall be republican, and in no wise contravening said oath, such shall be recognized as the true government of the State, and the State shall receive thereunder the benefits of the constitutional provision which declares that ’the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and, on application of the legislature, or the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.’”

Also further:  “that any provision that may be adopted by such state government, in relation to the freed people of such State, which shall recognize and declare their permanent freedom, provide for their education, and which may yet be consistent, as a temporary arrangement, with their present condition as a laboring, landless, and homeless class, will not be objected to by the national executive.  And it is suggested as not improper that, in constructing a loyal state government in any State, the name of the State, the boundary, the subdivisions, the constitution, and the general code of laws, as before the rebellion, be maintained, subject only to the modifications made necessary by the conditions hereinbefore stated, and such others, if any, not contravening said conditions, and which may be deemed expedient by those framing the new state government.”

Concerning this proclamation, the message which communicated it noted:  that it did not transcend the Constitution; that no man was coerced to take the oath; and that to make pardon conditional upon taking it was strictly lawful; that a test of loyalty was necessary, because it would be “simply absurd” to guarantee a republican form of government in a State “constructed in whole, or in preponderating part, from the very element against whose hostility and violence it is to be protected;” that the pledge to maintain the laws and proclamations as to slavery was a proper condition, because these had aided and would further aid the Union cause; also because “to now abandon them would be not only to relinquish a lever of power, but would also be a cruel and astounding breach of faith.”

He continued:  “But why any proclamation, now, upon the subject?  This question is beset with the conflicting views that the step might be delayed too long or be taken too soon.  In some States the elements for resumption seem ready for action, but remain inactive, apparently for want of a rallying point,—­a plan of action.  Why shall A adopt the plan of B rather than B that of A?  And if A and B should agree, how can they know but that the general government here will reject their plan?  By the proclamation a plan is presented which may be accepted by them as a rallying point, and which they are assured in advance will not be rejected here.  This may bring them to act sooner than they otherwise would.

“The objection to a premature presentation of a plan by the national executive consists in the danger of committals on points which could be more safely left to further developments.