The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-05-28
Is the War to be Renewed Change in the
Basis OF Representation.

From The Times.
MIR. Robert Dale Owen, in letter recently
published declared that 1.-The North would
renew the war tomorrow" rather than endure
the inequality of representation in proportion
to voters which the Constitution now gives the
Southern States in consequence of the destruc-
ton of slavery. He rea1lrns this opinion in a
reply to our comments upon this declaration.
But we see nothing in the reasons by which he
supports 1t TO render it even plausible.
MIR. Owen presents this inequality as a case of
intolerable tyranny, which, be thinks, the North
VIII resent and resist in force, unless II Is given
up. But MIR. Owen must be aware that 1t is
nothing new. It has existed from the very be-
ginning of the Government. The Constitution
made population, and not U0terS the basis and
measure OF representation. This Is all there is
OF It. 1t has always been the fundamental law of
the land, that every State should have representa-
tives In proportion to its aggregate population,
ana not simply in proportion 10 those of its
people who are permitted to VOTE
In New York aliens are not allo we'd to
vote, but they are counted in deciding the num-
Der OF representatives to which the State is
entitled. In Massachusetts, nobody can
vote except those citizens OF the United States
who can read and write-yet aliens as well as
natives, who can do neither, are counted in
the basis of representation. In Illinois and
other Western States, negroes are not allo we'd
to vote, yet they are counted in fixing the num-
Der OF their representatives. And precisely the
same thing, and nothing more, is true in South
Carolina anu in Georgia. The number of their
representatives depends upon their aggregate
population, not upon the number of their voters.
This is a constitutional provision. applicable to
all the Statec alike, and not to the Southern States
alone. 1t has always been SO, except that while
slavery existed only thIee-fIths OF that part OF
the population who we're slaves we're counted
IN determining the basis of representation this
di3tlnCtion has been abrogated by the destruc-
a hat q
larger portion OF their population are not voters
at the South than at the North, the South has
more representatives IN proportion to UoterS than
the North. But the Constitution never based
representation upon voters at all. The number
OF voters has never hitherto had any thing what
ever to do with the number OF repre- SentqtiYes.
That feature has never y ct been enVratted upon
our system OF government. The people adopt I'd
the Constitution without it, and Congress has
never yet even proposed that it should be
amended in this particular. DID,. ..
Now we cite these iacts-Lot as showing that
no amendment is needed-but as showing that
the North is not likely to "reneW the war; un-
less an amendment is now made for which iC
has never hitherto thought it worth while even
TO ask. MIR. Owens opinion on this point seems
to us simply absurd. We believe the people Of
the North desire such an amendment. They
would gladly See representation based on UOterS
instead OF on population, as heretofore; because
IT Woulo give them a relative increase of power,
by diminishing the representation OF the
those. States now enjoy is distinctly and eS-
pressly conferred upon them by the Constitu-
lion. They hold it by precisely the same title
which gives us our right-the same precisely
which give 10 any State any representation at
all. We would like this changed; but to say
that "the North will renew the war; unless it is
changed, is to talk nonsense. ...- ..........
But Mr. Os en- says that unless we make this
change condition precedent 10 any representa-
tion of the South in Congress, we can never
secure it. Possibly that may be true, but 1t
affords no reason Tor renewing the war; Nor
in our judgment, does it afford any reason for
eXacting this condition. If we require that con-
dition we may require any other; chat and il
simply treating the Southern States as so many
conquered provinces, outside the provisions of
the Constitution altogether. We do not hold,
we say in reply to Mr.. Owens question, that the
war, or the victory. or the cost of battle. has
gwen our Government the right to discard the
restrictions which the Constitution imposes
upon its power, or to change one of the clearest
ana most explicit of its clauses in any other
mode than the one pointed out for its own
amendment.
Ar. Owen says that by refusing to exact this
change as condition of admission TO represen'
tation in Congress (Which he styles peaceful,
constitutional remedy. we make renewal of
the war" on the part OF the North necessary and
probable, and thus peril the public tranquility.
We do not think so. That amendment can be
Judgment, if the whole North desires it, by the
ordinary course OF pubic action. 1t involves
the surrender of portion OF political power on
the part OF the South, until they are ready to
extend their suffrage Is not this case where
equaUdlents may be fairly offered anG accepted?
And cannot the North much better afford equiva
lents which shall secure the end, than to seek
the same end by renewal of the wa-p Ger
tainly the resources of craftsmanship ought to
be equal to the solution OF such problem Let
Mr. owen turn his attention to other means than
legislative coercion, or renewal OF the war,
and see whether he cannot think of some better
scheme Tor remedying the inequality which b.
somewhat exaggerates, but of which he Justly
complains.