Cleveland morning leader. [volume] (Cleveland [Ohio]) 1854-1865, 1859-10-04
judge Ranney in anothor right Place,

Judge Ranney has taken up on the stump the
ho,oi Of tho Democrat, Dealer, Statesman, etc
against the longer voting by citizens Of Ohio Of
African descent, thus disfranchising class Of
voters, many Of them born in Ohio, who have
heretofore enjoyed tho elective franchise under
both the Old Constitution and the New, and the
decision Of the Democratic Supreme Judges of
the State. He appro-es aud spplauds the law
passed by the Democratic Legislature last win
ter to visit all such voters with pains and pen
alties of fines and imprisonments, as well as
persons who in any way enable or counsel them
to vote. Such is Judge Rannoy's present pO-
sition. Now let us see where he stood on this
very subject in the Constitutional Convention.
BY the Constitution of Ohio the decision cf
the Supreme Court as to all matters of cOnsG
tutional construction, aud constitutional righis,
is the supreme law of the State.
The old Constitution limited the right Of
suffrage to white persons. The question as to
what was meant by the word "white" was
subject of frequent inquiry by the courts. 1t
was finally carried before the Supreme Court, of
which Gov. Wood, Judge Read and Judge
Birchard, then Democrats, were members. The
case is reported in the 18th Ohio Reports, page
$40, in which the Court, Judge Wood and Judge
Birchard concuning, decide that Malattoes have
the right TO vote. They say:
'The majority or preponderance of blood,
either black or white, carries with 1t conclusive
evidence of the qualifications conferred, &C."
This was the settled Interpretation of the
old constitution, assented to by all when the
new constitution was formed, and was well
known and understood by Judge Ranney who
was a member of the constitutional conven.
ton.
When the question of the right Of suffrage
was before the convention il was proposed tC
change the rule of the old constitution. inter
preted by the Democratic Supreme Judges .ant
leave the whole subject to the Legislature.
This Judge Ranney opposed and is officially
reported in the constitutional debates to have
said:
'He could see no reason why the elective fran
chise should be placed so as to be varied to sui
the caprices and changes of opinion of tn,
General Assembly He iranted 10 leave herigh
of suffrage where the old constitution left it,"
1T was proposed here TO leave every thing t.
the General Assembly. To this he was oDpo
sed lie had seen no difficulty under the pres
ent constitution" "He only desirct
that the constitution should define the elective
franchise, and hoped that the convention was
not about to leave rights so important to be
sought for in the acts Of the General Assem-
bly,"
The views of Judge Ranney prevailed in the
convention, ami the provisions of the old con.
sttutiou, as interpreted by Democratic Su
prome Court, were incorporated into the new
constitution. Thus Judge Ranney, knowingly
and with full understanding of the subject
voted to give Mulattoes the right of suffrage
and to withhold from the Legislature the pow
er to prevent it.
Such is Judge Ranney's record. No wonde
Democratic papers themselves are forced to sn
that the Western Reserve is dangerous plac
TO select Democratic candidate for GovelnC
from Their candidate labored to fasten negr
voting upon the State by Constitutional prov
sion, beyond the power of the Legislature I
remedy, and yet he is now sturping the Stat
and raising hue and cry against regro sui
flasc! Such inconsistency ought TO make evel
an honest black man blush. What a mscrabl
changeling q Democratic office seeking politi
clan must make of himself, to keep up with th
negrophobis the slave power continually force
into the very existence of the party! Judg
Rlnney of 1850, and candidate Ranney of 1855
illustrates the subject capitally. Let the Pee
l"decide.