The Sun.
London, England, 1868-07-16 00:00:00

is no risk in rebellion ; resist at your pleasure ;
if you succeed, you will have obtained the object
of your desires ; if you fail, you will have lost no
political attribute ; therefore, rebel, and rebel as
occasion shall permit." This is what the Demo-
cratic party now virtually says : the Western
Democrats are not more reticent in the expression
of their opinion than those of South Carolina or of
Mississippi. Can the people of the United States
adopt these views? We believe that the Republi-
can party, as represented by its legislators, has
done many unwise and some invalid acts ; but we
more firmly believe that if the positions of the
Democratic party be adopted the war for nationality
will have been turned into a farce.

The other principle which the Democratic party
now• maintains is that this is a " white man's go-
verntnent," and therefore that the electoral fran-
chise should under no circumstances be given to
the negro. We would not mistake the posi-
tion. If we could see any signs of a desire to
establish 'a qualification of intelligence or moral
worth we might be satisfied. But there is no such
sign. The party has placed itself boldly upon the
position of denying to the negro citizen any part
whatever in the management of public affairs. The
"visible admixture" law of Ohio, passed during the
present session of the State Legislature, illustrates
this tendency. 'We need not argue that all this is
in direct antagonism with the living principles
which the Democratic party once promulgated with
an enthusiasm which made success certain. We do
not now stop to discuss the correctness of the op-
posing theory in relation to the electoral franchise ;
it may be a manhood right; it may be a trust
wielded for the benefit of the whole mass of people.
We only say that the Democratic party originally
attained its ascendancy by advocating the former
theory, and that now it has no argument whatever
to support its restriction of the theory to white men.
It appeals only to prejudice, and upon the preju-
dices of the " baser sort" it hopes to ride into power.
But we will for a moment recall our statement.
One gentleman of prominence among the New
York Democrats has thought it important to sug-
gest a scientific basis for the rejection of negro
voters. Ile has with much show of learning stated
that the family is the unit of society, and therefore
that the family should be the source of political
power. We can understand this. The nation is, in
fact, somewhat old—it carries us back to Abraham
and the other tribal sheiks among the Western
Asiatics, and to the paterfamilias of the early
Roman Republic. But still the notion has a cer-
tain logical consistency. The head of the family may
be in some sense looked upon as the representative of
his descendants and dependants, and as, therefore,
the depositary of all political power belonging to
that aggregate of individuals. We can under-
stand this conception of a social organization, but
can hardly reconcile it with our modern notions of a
Republican Government. But we have misunderstood
the scientfic Democrat. He gives a different term to
the idea of the family. The family is the social
and political unit, and therefore no persons who
cannot become members of the family are clothed
with any political rights. Negroes cannot become
members of a white family, and therefore should
not be permitted to vote. That is to say, all fami-
lies must be white ; all Asiatic and African connec-
tions are mere concubinage. We are afraid that, if

the learned and scientific members of the Manhat-
tan Club should carry out their thepry to its easy
results, they would disfranchise the Sixth Ward and
many other strongholds of Democracy.
We have thus seen that of the two grand prin-
ciples now set forth by the Democratic Party, one
has received the unmistakable condemnation of the
people, and the other is in direct hostility to its
earlier and better doctrines.

Our time and space will not permit us to enlarge
upon some of the practical measures of policy which
were once the points of contest between the Demo-
cratic party and the Whigs. Do we expect now
any clear utterance from the approaching Conven-
tion upon the subjects of internal improvements,
United States banks, protective tariff, metallic cur-
rency ? The people have settled the question of
those improvements which aid the foreign and the
inter-State commerce. Will the Democratic party
raise its VOIC3 against the Pacific Railway ? The
National Bank system has not only taken the place
of the old United States Bank against which Jack-
son and Benton fought with such untiring zeal, but
has swallowed up the States institutions. Will the
Democratic party decree, its overthrow ? A paper
currency has driven all gold and silver out of cir-
culation. Will the Democratic party repeat its old
hard-money doctrine. It appears as though they
hoped to obtain power upon the extreme opposite
measure.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S LETTER

70 MR. MORAN.

(From the Anglo-American Times.)

Mr. Seward's letter of June 22 to Mr. Moran has
been commented upon with severity by the Daily
News. At such a juncture as the present, the
active, indefatigable Seward could not be expected
to remain quiet. Indeed, we fear that the British
lion will have very many missiles hurled at him
pending the election of the President. There will
be a great deal of " dirt " thrown in every directioi
in the United States, and exemption would be too
much for cousin Bull to expect. At such times hii
relationship is a misfortune, but as no position in
this world is without its drawbacks, he must accept
the bad with the good. As a State paper the docu ,
went is below contempt ; and will not remove the
feeling now gaining ground that the sooner the
Minister of State retires the better for the country,
as, however able Seward has been, human intellect
will not last for ever, and may be impaired by over-
work as well as by age. The Daily News has very
properly shown the absurdity of talking of the judicial
severity of the British Government. It is true that
the Queen can pardon, but beyond advising her
Majesty on this point, the British Government in
London had no more to do with the trial and sen-
tence of the prisoners than the Government at
Washington. When George Francis Train appealed
against his incarceration for debt, it was to the Army
and Navy of the United States, wherein he showed
his sense, and when Mr Seward writes letters like
this he ought to send a statement of the force
with which he is prepared to cram English laws
down the throats of the English people. The
document is really not worth discussing, the more
so as the Senate have no intention of passing the
bill to which Mr. Seward alludes, which may re-
quire the President to make reprisals in case of
judicial denial in Great Britain to naturalised
Americans of the rights conceded to native Ameri-
cans. What he means we cannot explain, unless
it be the trial by a mixed jury and the substitution
of a charge for piracy instead of treason-felony.
Such documents unfortunately remain as records
of the foreign policy of the United States, and if
Mr. Seward were spared for many years a blush
might be brought to his cheek when his epistles
were dealt with by the historian of the period. The
following is the letter .

"Department of State, Washington, D.C.,
June 22.

"Sir,—The correspondence recorded in your
legation is full of remonstrance and expostulation,
which, by the President's direction I have addressed
to her Majesty's Government against the imprison-
ment of Messrs. Warren and Costello. The reasons
have been fully and frequently assigned why the
judicial severity by the British Government in
these cases has tended to embarrass the friendly
relations between the two countries, and to pro-
tract the political excitement which has so greatly
disturbed the peace of the British realm, and of the
British provinces adjacent to the United States.
On many occasions I have had the honour to urge
on the British Government the necessity of a modifi-
cation of the law of the British realm, in the case
of subjects of Great Britain, who have become
citizens of the United States under our naturaliza-
tion laws. By the President's direction, also, I
have, with much urgency, invited the British Go-
vernment to enter into an equal treaty with the
United States on that subject as a proceeding which
is essential for the removal of discuntents which, it
suffered to continue, might involve the two nations
in reprisal or war. Hitherto these proceedings have
been unfruitful, although we have many friendly
assurances of a favourable disposition on the part
of the British Government. In connection with
this matter the President now makes it my duty
to give you a copy of a resolution of the House of