The Jeffersonian Democrat. [volume] (Chardon, Ohio) 1854-1865, 1865-08-11

|
main quietly in that position. Ho will, 10
time, assert and maintain his right to be
an equal participator in all the blessings and
franchises enjoyed by bis follow country mon
of a lighter hue.
There are many other comments sug
gosted by Gen. Coxs letter, but, having al
ready extended this article to an unusual
longth, wo close by expressing the hope
that the discussion he invites will serve TO
promote the cause of Universal Suffrage.
Negro Equality and Kindred Topics
A Mr.. J. Ba!linger, of Sonora, Hancock
Co., ILL.,, propounds tho following questions
to tho Editor of tho New York Tribune:
/. Are you in favor of eIeva,ing tho me-
groes among US to a social equality with tho
Whites? =. .. ......:
2. Are you in favor of their filling The Of.
fees within the gift of the people, from the
lowest TO the highest. whether Legislative,
Executive, or Judicial? =. .- -...
3, And, to cap the climax, are you 10 ia.
vor of Amalgamation? ".a..-..
Mr.. GroeIey's answers to these questions
are 80 explicit and sensible, and SO we'll ex.
pressour own views, that VIC quote them 10
full: ..-........ .,. ........ ........ '....
l. Wo co not know whether negroes
would be elevated" or not ty social eGuali.
ty with Whites; ssme discerning men think
they would rather be degraded by il But
there Is no ouch thing as social equality"
on earth, and never can be while some are
good, others bad; some intelligent, others
| ignorant; somo coarse and repulsive, others
refined and agreeable. Sonora is not very
large place; yet We will venture to assert
that there are Whites 10 IL who do not id.
vite Mr.. Balinger to dinner, and others
whom he docs not invite. Ne insist that be
aud every one else shall continse to CT Joy
perfect freedom in the premises, and regard
whomsoever each OF them severally will as
superiors. equals or inierioas. So with all
others. Whito or Black. We advocate the
largest liberty In all matters Of social inter
course, so that, VI White and Black choose
to live on terms of social intimacy, they
may; If not, not. Our correspondent will
give our opiuiOus Whatever name shall
please him. Social equality does not. and
never did exist; social relations are entirely
matters of choice; and with any Otber per-
sons intimacies W. do not intermeddle.
| But.h Mr.. Biilinger refers to legal qsai-
ity where he talks of social, W must tell
him that We do favor trgaL equality between
the highest and the Iowest in the social
scale. We claim all legal rights, and what
we claim wo willingly conoede TO others -
In Great Britain, FOR example, Dukes arc
not apt to invite chimney weeps to dinner,
and are not likely to change their practice
in this respect; but any chinney-swoep may
invite any Duke into Court. and tho invita-.
| ton will have to DO accepted. Being in
Court, the sweep may call other sweeps to
testify as to his claim or grievance, and the
Duke must rebut their testimony, or meet
whatever verdict it shall show to be just
And We do faver such equality, and hope to
soc it established wherever it has not al.
ready. been. .,- ..... .-..... .I.....
2. We are 10 favor of filling Offices with
just such persons as q majority of the legal
voters shall prefer. We never voted, nor
wished to vote. for negro; but, If we ever
should be required to vote, and should hap
4 pen to know negro whom we doomed em :
ineptly fit for the place to be filed, we
should deem 1t a wrong ii q law or oonstitu- :
tional restriction constrained US to vote for
some one elso or not vote at oil. ..z, t.....
3. If by "amalgamatiOn" is meant the in.
termiBgling of tho White and Black races,
and, II the question DO. Do you consider
this advisable or desirable? our answer is,
No. We do not. There seems to us ma.
tural repulsion between Whites and Blacks
which may, indeed, DO over borne or defied,
but which must have been implanted for
some good end, and which we therefore re.
spect aud dosire to see respected. There
will generally ariso quite enough provoca.
tions to difference in the married state with.
out superadding this lit seems to us) natur.
al instructive repugnaRce of race. Hence,
as rule. We do not think tho intermarriaae
of Christians With jews advisable, no. shat
of Roman Catholics with Protestants, nor
oven that Of the sternIy Orthodox with ra.
tionalizing Quakers, Unitarans and Univer.
: salis,s. We do not say that these differ
r ences Of croeds are nsuperable bars to mar.
riage. but that, Othor things being equal, it
were bettor to seek partners for life among
those with whom you have no essential dif.
, ference or disagreement. .,.n ......
But. ii our correspondent means, Would
you by law prohibit and punish intermar.
riages between White and dBlack?"-our an.
swer would be, No, We would not. Civil
law has no warrant to interfere iu matters
OF taste. We should certainly advise no
White to marry a Black; but, if such a
couple were resolved to marry, we would
, interpose no legal obstacle and desire none
, Aud, If tho question were--"Shall thew
marry or be intimate without marriage:"-
we should say. Let them marry" though