Fremont journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County [Ohio]) 1853-1866, 1866-01-19
GOV. ANDREW ON THE BASIS OF REP
RESENTATION.

Gov. Andrew, of Massachusetts, in his other
what seems TO us the most promising measure
in the programme of Southern Restoration
We allude to the Schenck amendment 10 the
Constitution, providing for aPpcFtioning repre-
sentation to voters, instead of total population,
as at present Gov Andrew places his opposi-
ton to the measure upon two grounds First,
that it is repugnant to the true republican prin-
ciple to base representation upon any class and
not upon the whole body of the people; and,
second, that it would leave the freedmen entire
Iy in the hands of their late masters, which can
not be safely or honorably done.
We confess to inability TO perceive the force
of these objections. Firstly, can provision be
repugnant to true republicanism, the sole ten
depcy of which is, to encourage the extension of
the elective franchise? Or, secondly, does it nee
essarily or even implicitly follow, that, if this
amendment is passed, no ether safeguard will
be enacted against the spirit Of rebellion and
slaveryP ..
The Governor thinks that South Carolina, e. g.,
would prefer representation of &tree in the
House without, to sir with the colored vote
No doubt she would to-day. But. almost be-
fore the amendment could be ratified in The or
binary course, we should see a powerful party
arising in the Palmetto State with Universal
Enfranchisement blazoned on its banner. Local
self-interest, with some leaven of eternal love Of
Justice, would carry that party and its prin-
ciples to speedy victory. We have rural, un-
sophisticated faith in the Spirit of Progress even
in Oottoudom. Especially, when this Spirit is
providentially assisted by evident self-interest
With this fulcrum, if by means of no other, Ar
chimedes may raise the world South Carolina
would not long continue the persistent abuse of
her own nasal organ out of spite to the less fair
features of her comely countensnce. Neither
would Georgia, Louisiana or Mississippi.
We regret to record an illustration of the
great influence of local interest on politics, in
Gov. Andrews opposition to the Schenck
amendment. But if so true patriot as he can be
led to oppose measure so salutary, because
thereby his own section would lose some votes
in Congress, we certainly need not fear that the
same influence if brought to bear, yiiipot make
the proposed amendment efficient f6f the ends
of Justice in the South.
When population merely is made the basis of
representation, of course the older States like
Massachusetts have an undue advantage over
the Western States, since the proportion of wo-
men and children in the old States is much
greater. But, for the petty reason implied in
this fact, viii New England reject the amend
ment in Congress or her Legislatures? We can
not believe it. The difference it will make
against that section will surely not be deemed
of sufficient moment to require the defeat of a
measure so fraught with wisdom, Cancellation
and justice.
If possible let Us by all means induce the
South to herself enact justice in behalf of her
freedmen, rather than seek the same end by
perpetual military occupation and force.