New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1863-04-22
SOLDIERS RIGHTS.

This day at noon the decisive vote is 10 be
taken in the Assembly on Judge Lows bill
providing for the exercise of the Right Of Suf.
frage by the legal voters of our State who
shall, on the day Of the next and of every sub
segment election, be absent from their homes
in the Military or Naval service Of their coun.
try. This measure is so incontsstlbIy, obviously
Just, that its adyersaries are constrained to
resort to all manner of inconsistent preteIh
and lodges to excuse their opposition.
They say that the soldiers are mainly Of
their school in politics. If they believed this
does any one imagine that they would uphold
their disfranchsement
No. they do not believe anything Of the sort.
We have personal knowledge of township after
township in which, while their voters are pretty
evenly divided in politics, nineteen-twentieths
of those who have volunteered for the War
are Republicans. 1t is this disparity which
accounts for the uniform Republican prepon-
derance in the soldiers vote of every State
which has secured their Right of Sufrage is
is this which accounts for the Democratic
triumphs or gains in nearly or quite every
Free State whose absent soldiers have no voice
in their Elections. And this accounts, more
over, for Democratic repugnauce to letting
the soldiers vote.
They say that they also are in favor of CO.
sbhng the Soldiers to vote, but this can only be
done by constitutional amendment. Wdy.
then, have they not initiated such amendment
in "A single one of the States whose Legislatures
they carried last Fall-New.Jersey Indiana,
Ininoisi Why did they not initiate it in
Rhode Island during their last two years Of uu-
disputed sway.
They say that the votes of soldiers in camp
will be controlled by their officers. IL this
were at all true, Judge Lows bhl would not
be liable to the objection; for no officer caa
know how q soldier votes under that bill unless
the voter chooses to proclaim it. He prepares
bis ballot when, where, and as he peases, aud
transmits it by mail, express or Otherwise to
that trusted friend at home whom he deputies
TO cast it, Even if an officer should bully brs
into sending a reluctant vote, be could cancel
that vote privately next day or next week by
sending another of which no officer would have
any knowledge. His protection against unwar-
rantablo influence is under this bill complete.
The simple, naked reason for Democratic op.
position to this bill is the universal knowledge
that three-fourths of our Volunteers, like those
OF other States who have hitherto been ena-
bled to vote, are Republicans or War Demo-
Gratis of Ike faith and purpose. We shall seq
if the Democratic members will venture on THU
account to defeat Judge Lows bill.
The Constitution needs no Amendment to
authorize soldiers voting. They are citizens;
the Constitution expressly provides that they
do not lose their residence by absence as SOL
diers; it is not denied that they can vote il
they return for that purpose. But why need
they returnl Does the Constitution prescribe
that they shall be personally present at the
polls 1t surely does not. Neither does rea-
son require it: the vital point is that they b
legal voters, and that the votes Of all such,
ano of no others, be received. Scrutinlze
every mans qualifications vigorously; but if he
is q legal voter, and thousand miles from
home defending his country, facing death on 8
post which it is desertion and treason to quit,
why should his vote be refused The Consti.
tuition does not require it; Why should youi
"Ah but he may have been shot between
the hour of dispatching and that of polling his
vote" Yes, that is possibility. And Will
you disfranchise hundred thousand living
voters and death.defying patriots to exclude
the possibility of q few having their votes
polled to-day who gave their lives for their
country yesterday Members of the Legisla-
ture consider well before you deny to tho
soldier his vots!