The tri-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1866-1868, 1866-06-16

i Quires no property quallhcaLlo on leI citiAcIS
have no barrier thrown areuna snein w. Mnle e
makes an odious distinction amongst them;
! no exclusiveness in her fundamental law no
idle declaration that the people are the source
of all political power contained In one sec
/ ton of her Constitution, and IN another
/ principle announced which indicates dls-
/ trust of the capacity of the people tor sell
4 government; no limitation and restriction
! upon her people in selecting officers, as IS
the case with us, to one-fourth or fifth of her
| entire white male adult population
But the cry is. property is the great ele-
ment of conservatism" When did it become
| 500 What State government has proven tne
truth of this assertion9 Having shown that
| thirty-one States of the Union require no
property qualification, and that no evil has
| followed from their action, let us look at the
property qualification required by two OF the
| five States which, like our own State, hold
to the idea that property is the test for quail
ification for office. Take South Carolina
She required that every member OF her Leg
islature should own five hundred acres OF
land, and what she regarded as of more con-
sequence, ten live negroes. These constitut-
ed the incumbent statesman. With her
all other considerations yielded to the pos
session of broad fields and grinning negroes.
l need not remind delegates that for thirty
five years her legislation was mainly directed
towards an overthrow of the federal govern
negroes controlled her destinies. The peo-
Pile had no political rights. The masses
| were not only denied seats in her legislative
halls, but not permitted to vote TOR their
own Governor, or electors for President
Here, then, we find property qualification Tor
Office deeply engrafted in her organic law,
and what was the consequence? An arls-
tocracy ruled with an iron rod, the people
| were made subservient to the will and capri
ces of this " element of conservatism as
property is sometimes called; and have
right to infer from her political course that
if her people, the true and legitimate source
of all power, had been able to have shaken
off the manaces with which they were bound
hand and foot, great and terrible evil might
possibly have been averted.
| But why refer to the property qualification
| for office of South Carolina2 Go North and
select the only New England State which
retains property qualification for office
Take Massachusetts, Her name is assoclat-
ed with South Carolina as having some pro-
clivity for radicalism. She, too, believes in
property qualification for Office. Intending
| to do her full justice have only to refer
delegates to the legislation of this State for
the past fifty years, and they will find she
eminently deserves the title of being called
the mother of many of the social and politi-
| cal evils which have afflicted society and the
country at large for many years past.
The delegate from Harnett fears the adop-
| ton of the amendment will open our Guber-
material chair and legislative halls to all the
worthless vagabonds which aff1ict every
State. He surely has not kept up with pass
ing events. Other States where property
qualification is not required have not been
| afflicted with the evils which haunt my
friends Imagination. He surely must be
distrustful of the people, if he supposes the
adoption of the proposed amendment will be
attended with such evils. He asks US why
was not this matter agitated in the Conven-
ton of 1882 The answer is plain one
The Legislature which called that Conven-
ton into being, limited its powers to few
proposed amendments, and they therefore
had not the power to make such a change
He also insists that the people have not been
consulted about the proposed change, and
that it is not our business to be changing the
organic law without their sanction. The
delegate has voted for several ordinances
here that have proposed radical changes
which are liable to the imputation he brings
against this proposed change besides, the
Constitution will doubtless be submitted to
the people for their approval or rejection.
The distinguished delegate from Wake
cautions us against putting our hands rude
ly on the work of our forefathers. He tells
us that it was conceived by them in wisdom,
and that policy requires us to let their work,
a monument of their wisdom, remain in
tact, but history and experience should teach
us that it is not always safe to adhere to the
works of our forefathers, especially if their
works prove a stumbling block to political
justice.
This is an age of progress and improve
ment; let US cling to the political principles
of our ancestors, if they be founded in wis
dom and suited to the times we live in. A
blind reverence for tracking and patterning
after our ancestors, will prevent progress and
check improvement.
The distinguished delegate from Wake,
pays high eulogy to the Judiciary of Eng
land. I heartily join him in this respect, and
say with pride that since the revolution in
England in 1858, justice has been admins
tered in that country so as to more effectu-
ally preserve and protect persons and pro-
perty than can be found elsewhere but here
my admiration ceases. Her system of gov
eminent has always been to sustain landed
aristocracy and hereditary nobility. The
masses of her people have been ground
down by taxation and oppression. In former
days, when the greatest Judge who ever pre-
sided in her Courts, who built up and
incorporated into her common law, a COM
mercial code W hich is the admiration of the
world-a man whose name will live as long
as the common law ITSELF mean Lord
Mansfeld-this same England was taxing
her colonies without representation. Her tyr
ranny towards her colonies gave birth to the
principles upon which this government was
founded. Her treatment of Ireland, as well
as her colonies, forbids me from bestowing
eulogiums upon her form of government. 1
have before said, her political system is not
founded on the grand idea upon which rests
our whole political fabric-that all political
power is vested in and derived from the peo>
pie only Such a doctrine could not exist
for one moment IN England it would wrench
the crown from her queen; Danish her hered-
itary nobility from official position, and place
her landed aristocracy upon political equal
ity with the humblest of her now down
trodden subjects. Let her be no more quo
ted as model for us to initiate, whilst her
form of government DISTINGUISHES such a
large proportion of her people, and grirds
into oppression her poorer subjects.
The delegate from Guilford, Chr Cald-
welD in his speech in opposition to the pro-
posed amendment. has unintentionally fur
nished convincing argument in favor of
its adoption. He informs the Convention
that one of the Governors of this State had