The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1865-09-09
Democrat Opinions.


cept the gratuitous advice, don't register all
rebels sympathizers and aiders oNthe slave
holders rebellion that follow the rccommen-
daton of their leaders and take the ''oaths
prcscribed,n it will be no fault of Mr..
Stump's or The Democrat, who last week
gave them elaborate opinionS--the one edi
torilv and the other in Chief Justice style,
"forlifyng," as The Democrat phrases it,
teach step of its argument, and each posi-
ton it assumes by authorities from the great
est lights of the profession"
This Opinion, ''as is an opinion is based
by its author, he tells us, on the "dssump-
Constitution are valid and in full force, and
that the last General Assembly was legally
constituted; - which is to say that the
Union men usurped authority in the State
by putting down the rebel party.
Now, it matters not whether Mr.. Stump
and The Democrat, like JEFF. Davis, assumes
that facts are facts, or hypothesis. The
former may assume that the Union men of
the State have put down them and their per-
nicious doctrines, and the latter, lying in
Fortress Monroe, may assume also, for the
sake Of argument, that the united energies
of the American people have put him and
his rebel armies down. Both are efiectually
crushed with the doctrines they promulgat-
ed and we will just here add, they are likely
to remain so while they hold to such doc
trines.
But to Mr. Stump's argument:
1t seems that it has been left to this OK
FOUNDER of the law, and fulminator of scces-
sion doctrine, to proclaim that the right to
vote is a common law right hence the negro
having been declared citizen of the United
States, has the common law right to vote,
had not the ''wretches who made the Con-
stitution of Maryland'-as the classical edi-
tor of The Democrat delights to style our
late Legislators and Delegates who framed
tho Consttution-ruledhi him out. Mr. Stump
argument proves one thing at the outset,
which is, that all citizens having common
law right to vote, the negro must possess the
right, and is, therefore, wrongfully deprived
of it. Now while Mr.. Stump is champion
ing the rights of rebels, who have been dis
franchiscd by the ''wretches who made the
Constitution of Maryland" and the Regis,
try law, lei him see that the negro who has
as much common law right to vote as these
disfranchsed traitors, and has been deprived
Of thai right which sis most transcendent
thing, and Of high nature" Lord Holt
says, has this Common law right" secured
to him.
After laundering through more than two
columns Of abstruse reasoning and high:
sounding quotations not relevant to the
point at issue, he comes down to the naked
secession wish, which is that an applicant
for registration having taken the prescribed
oath, his name should be forthwith register,
ed, and no questions asked. If the leaders
of the party to which Mr. Stump belongs had
not taught their disciples since the beginning
of the rebellion that no oaths required as
tests of loyalty to the Government were
binding, and that all such should be disrc-
garded, and only taken to be "spewed OUT
again, there might be plausibilty in this part
of his opinion. But when it is a notorious
fact that one of the tenets of that party is to
disregard all oathes which are intended to
inquire into the disoyal practices of its
members; such to be considered invalid
and submitted to as matter of mere neces-
sary form, it becomes plainly the duty Of the
Registering Officers, as it is of the Judges
of Election, to take every means in their
power to carry out the true intent of the law
The only possible way to carry out the law
in its true intent and meaning, when it is a
known fact that the secession party Of this
State, as indeed of every other State in the
Union, are resolved to perjure themselves in
all matters wherein the privilege Of voting is
involved is to rest the burden Of proof upon
the applicant for registration.
A loyal man can readily prove his loyalty,
and while it will be impossible for Register
ing Officers to proce many man, who is
known to be disloyal, it will be equally as
difficult for him to find proof of what he is
SO ready to swear to. There is one point
here worthy of notice. There is not a single
instance in which disloyal men have been
refused registration on the evidence of a
third party, that they did not readily take
the oath and answer all questions in spirit
of loyalty equal to the most radical oppo,
nent of the rebellion, and these men com.
pare favorably with their brother secession.
lists.
What course, then, shall we pursue in face
of this fact? Shall we allow this old seces-
sion party to follow out its anti, coercion pol
icy advocated for Union men at the COM
mencement of the rebellion, while active
warfare was pursued by the secessionists p
Or shall we circumvent their system of false
swearing by compelling them to prove by
third parties their loyalty? Their systemat-
ic judicial lying makes this course necessary.
Bs5"We call attention to the advertise
ment of ''Farvile Institute, in the present
issue. The location of this School is at
Fairvi]le, Chester CO., Pa, about u miles
from the Baltimore Central Railroad. The