Republican vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1857, 1849-10-15

ana SAeI0its the 0tner.
The right Of suffrage, however,it seems is not
n natural right. If by natural, is meant what Is
just and reasonable, then, nothing is more reason
able than that those whose purses contribute to
maintain, whose lives are pledged to defend the
country, should participate III all the privileges
of citizenship. But say it is not a natural right
Whence did the freeholders derive it! How be-
GONE it's exclusive possessors! Will they arro-
gantly tell US they own the country, because they
hold the land The right by which they hold
their land is not itself natural right; and by
consequence, nothing claimed as incidental to it.
Whence then did they derive this privilege p
From grant or request Not from the latter
No war has ever been waged to assert it. If from
the former, by whom was it conferred They
cannot, if they would, recur to the Royal instruc
tons OF that English monarch, of infamous me-
Inory, who enloined it upon the Governor OF the
then Colony Of Virginia. 'to take care that the
members of the assembly be elected only by the
freeholders, as being more agreeable 10 the Gus
tome of England .; he might have added more
congenaI also with monarchical institutions. If
Colonial regulations might properly be looked TO,
then the right not of freeholders merely, but OF
treemen, to vote, may be traced to a more dis
tant antiquity, and a less polluted source, But,
by orr ever glorious revolution, the Government
whence these regulations emanated, was annull-
ed and with it all the polite al privileges it had
Conferred. swept away VIII they rely on the
Constitutional provision! That was the act Of
men delegated by themselves. They exercised
the very right in question in appointing the body
from whom they profess to derive it, and indeed
to that body all the power it possessed. What
is this but to say they generously conferred the
privilege upon themselves? Perhaps they may
rely on length Of time to forestal enquiry. We
acknowledge no act of limitation against the OPP
pressed Or will they disdain to show any title:
and, cinging 10 power rest on force, the last ar
gument Of Kings, as its source and its defence
This were, doubtless, the more polite course.
Let us concede that the right OF suffrage is a
social right that it must of necessity be reeua
ted by society. Still the question recurs, is the
existing limitation proper! For obvious reasons
by almost universal consent, women and chill
,lren, aliens and slaves are excluded. 1t were
useless to discuss the propriety OF rule that
scarcely admits of diversity OF opinion. What
is concurred in by those who constitute the So
ciety, the body polite, must be taken to be right
But the exclusion of those classes Tor reasons
peculiarly applicable to Them is no argument for
excluding others to whom no one OF those reasons
applies.
Il is said TO be crpsdient, however, to exclude
non-freedolders also. Who shall Judge of this
expediency2 The society: and does that en-
brace the proprietors Of certain portions OF land
ers A harsh appellation would he deserve
who on the plea of expediency, should take,from
another his property: what then, should be said
OF him who Oh that plea, takes from another
his rights, upon which the security, not OF his
property only, but of his life and liberty depends
But the on-freeholders are condemned for
pursuing an abstract right, whose priyation &C.
caslons no practical injury.
Your memorialists do not, perhaps sufficiently
comprehend the precise import OF this language;
% often used The enjoyment of all other rights,
whether of person Or property, they wall not de-
ny, may be as perfect among those deprived OF
the privilege of voting, as among those possessing
it. 1t may be as great under despotisn; as I'LL
der any other form of Government. But they
alone deserve to be called free, or have guaran-
tee for their rights who participate in the forma-
ton of their political institutions, and an the
control of those who make and administer the
laws To such as may be disposed to surrender
this, Or any other immunity, to the keeping OF
Others, no practical mischief may ensue from its
abandonment or if any, none that will be justly
,nerited. Not so with him Who feels as u free
man should who would think for himself and
speak what he thinks who would not commit
his conscience or his liberty to the uncontrolled
direction of Others To him the priyation OF
right of that especially, which is the only safe
guard of freedom, is practically wrong. So
thought the fathers OF the republic. 1t was not
the oppressive weight of the taxes imposed by
England on Americ : it was the assertion OF a
right to impose any burdens whatever upon those
who We're not represented: to bind by laws
those who had no share personal or delegated,
in their enactment, that reused this continent to
arms Have the principles and feelings that then
prevailed persisted with the conflict to which
they gave birth If not, are they not now
grossly outraged! The question is submitted to
your candor and justice.
Never can your memoralists agree that peeu-
mary burdens or personal violence are the sole
injuries of which men may dare to complain. 1t
snay be that the freeholders have shown no dis
position greatly to abuse the power they have
assumed. They may haye borne themselves
with exemplary moderation. But their unrep-
resented brethren cannot submit to degrading
regulxtien which takes from them, on the sup
position OF mental inferiority or moral depravity
all share in the Government under which they
live They cannot yield to pretensons OF po-
litical superiority founded on the possession OF a
bit of land, Of whatever dimensions. They can
not acquiesce in political bondage, because those
who affect to sway over them the rod OF empire,
treat them leniently. The privilege which they
claim, they respectfully insist, is theirs as Of
right and they are under no obligation to as
sign any reason whatever for claiming it, but
that it is their own.
Let the picture be for moment reversed. Let
at be imagined that the nou-freeholders, possess
ing the physical superiority which alone can
cause their political influence to be dreaded,
should, at some future day, after the manner Of
the fresholdsrs, take the Government into their
own hands, and deal out to the latter the same
measure of justice they have received at their
hands 1t is needless to enquire into the equity
OF such proceeding; but would they not find
for it in the example set them at least a plausi-
BILE excuse, and to the freeholders' remonstrance
retort the freeholders' argument! That argu-
ment your memorialists will not now recapitu-
late they leave it to others to make the appli-
tcaton.
Your menorialists have thought it due to the
magnitude of the question, to examine at some
length the grounds on which their political pro-
scription is usually defended. lfthey have &C.
casionally been betrayed into warmth OF expires: