The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1839-11-27
suFFRAGE.


defeat Of Whigery Ia New York city, shat II may
be the means OF awakening the people OF moral
worth and property to due sense Of the danger Of
allowing those 10 vote who have no Interest In the
preservation Of our institutions"
No wonder that the Democrats every where pre-
vail when such sentiments are avowed by the Wing
parry. The Wings would not allow Democrats TO
vote--that IL, an individual must connect himself
with some bank, or other institution 10 entitle him
TO vote.
Men of moral scoriA aud property are to do the
voting, should the Conservative Wing party triumph.
The great majority Of the people, when the Conser.
natives triumph will be deprived CT the privilege OF
voting money will then be the test Of morality
The Conservative Wings have much to do, and TO
effect their purpose, must revive Biddes Institution
Dr. franklin said that II a man who owned horse,
could vote, and another who did not own one, could
not woe, that II was the horse that voted, not the
man. Windsor W Statesman.
The above extract is brought TO our notice
by the Globe.
The Vermont paper had good opportunity,
we confess, to give US sound fagellation,
but 1t turned it to very little account. The
text we find in the Madsonian was published
in the absence Of the editor, and we disclaim
the doctrine i inculcates at this our first OPP
portunity. II is not our doctrine-it is not
the doctrine of the Conservatives, and we
hope it is not that Of the Wings, that "proper-
ty should be the qualification of voters" No;
we are in favor Of extending the right Of suf-
frage to all citizens who are competent to APP
preciate the right Of citizenship, and able to
perform its duties. We are in favor Of univer-
sal suffrage. Whateve. of evil it may bring,
We believe to be more than counterbalanced
BY Its benefits Our government is based
upon the virtue and intelligence Of the peo-
plc--not upon property. The people are
honest in the main. and need but to be shield
ed from the seductive arts Of demagogues and
put in possession Of the truth, and they may
be safely trusted on al occasions. Disfran-
chise all but men Of property, and you dislran-
chise very large proportion ofthe American
people. The government, is safer in the hands
of the poor than under the administration Of
the rich, but il is administered with more eco
nomy BY the middling classes, than by either
extreme.
But the text from the Madsonian is, strictly,
defensible. It speaks Of awakening people Of
moral worth and property" (two classes,
may be rich and poor) 'to due sense Of the
danger Of allowing those to vote who have no
interest in the preservation Of our institutions"
This doubtless had reference to foreigners
who possess not the rights Of citizenship,
and therefore have no interest in our institu-
tons. but had as lief vote for monarch as
president, provided those who suborn them to
perjury at the polls pay them sufficiently. We
presume nobody will deny that there is danger
in allowing foreigners who are not citizens to
vote, and we hesitate not to say that If our
country ever experiences seriously i'll effects
from universal suffrage, il will be that abuse of
it which will arise from allowing too literally
to foreigners indulgence in its rights and pri-
vileges.
The loco-focos had right to bring down
the 300 paupers, naked and dirty, from the
Aims House to vote at the last election in
New York. The paupers had perhaps all
right to vote. But, we doubt not, that Gus
tom House officer who boosted that he had
brought 200 voters, mostly foreigners,from the
Croton Water Works, and who proclaimed
that he had a sufficient number Of others at
his bidding to change ward il necessary,
laughed in his sleeve the whole time al the
prodigious farce he was enacting, and at the
cruel burlesquc he was playing upon the SIN
tellgence and virtue" Of universal suffrage.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN VAN buren, AND
JEFFERSON
The pilgrimage Of the President during the
past and the preceding summer was, in our
humble opinion, in exceeding bad taste, to
say the least. Should we not be justified in
saying that It was unworthy Of gentleman Of
sense and modosty, and much more so of such