The suggestion in the proclamation as to maintaining the political
framework of the States on what is called reconstruction is made in
the hope that it may do good without danger of harm. It will save
labor and avoid great confusion.

But why any proclamation now upon this 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 objections to a premature presentation of a plan by the National
Executive consist in the danger of committals on points which could
be more safely left to further developments. Care has been taken to
so shape the document as to avoid embarrassments from this source.
Saying that on certain terms certain classes will be pardoned with
rights restored, it is not said that other classes or other terms
will never be included. Saying that reconstruction will be accepted
if presented in a specified way, it is not said it will never be
accepted in any other way.

The movements by State action for emancipation in several of the
States not included in the emancipation proclamation are matters of
profound gratulation. And while I do not repeat in detail what I