New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-10-25
SECRETARY BROEEING AND THE con-
STITUTTONAL AMENDMENT.

STITUJfOhAL AmEhDmENl
That Mr. johnson cannot obtain better defense Of
his policy than that which Secretary Browning has
made Is an illustration Of its weakness Mr.. Brown
ing has written three close columns Of type, and to so
little purpose that argument is scarcely to DO dis
covered Yet the President has fully approved the
letter. and desired il to be published as representing
his position, it is not without importance.
The President and Mr. Browning believe that "it
is not certain that we will the Government"
To this the American people enter an indignant denial
The dread which Mr. johnson and his advisers affect
that the Government in danger Of destruction isnot
felt By the people, and still less do they fear that their
direct Representatives in Congress the enemies OF
its existence. 1t il the trick Of tho Conservative
party to pretend that the Government may become
despotism by the will of the majority, and to de-
scribe Congress the natural enemy of our freedom.
Mr. Browning asserts that 1.-The legislative is much
the strongest Of the departments, and tho most
aggressive, because its members responsible to no
power but the will OF the dominant party for acts ID
usurpstion. 1t is the only department from the
encroschments OF which any serious danger
TO our institutions is TO be approbended."
But the veto power Of the President aud
the authority of the Supreme Court limitations
of Congress, of which Mr.. Browning does not even
hint Nor is usurpatisn to be dreaded from branch
Of the Government which directly represents the
people, not in the aggregate, but in the subdivision
of districts in every State Desposm in ell govern
nents begins with tho Executive and not with the
Legislative department. and VIC need 20 no further
back into history than the past year to proveh
The evils Of the Constitutional Amendment are the
burden Of Mr. Brownings letter. and even that just
provision, "Nor shall any State deprive any person Of
lfe liberty property, without due process Of law,
is declared unnecessary. and INTENDED to make all
State departments subordinate 60 the Federal Gov
eminent The argument By which this conclusion is
reached is too trivial to DO refuted ii is enough TO say
that fact 90 we'll theory requires that this principle
should be embodied in the National Constitution.
The Rebel States have repeatedly and grossly
outraged IT, and it is because life. liberty
aud property have been illegally taken away
in spite of mere State laws that the Federal Govern
mcnt is bound to extend equal protection to all ci
zens Tho change in the basis of representation Mr.
Browning opposes on the ground that the true basis is
aggregate population. No matter hop the eieetirs
franchise be disposed Of ,hsher exercised BY many
oil classes Of the community repreSnted." Is this
the Repubcansm Of the President Ne think il Of
great matter how the elective franchise is disposed Of
we hold that il belongs TO the many, and that in coun
tries in which il is exercised by the few the govern
ment is but an oligarchy II is pitiful that at
a time when the friends Of freedom are
seeking to extend the franchise under the British
monarchy, the President of the United States should
be ready TO decrease il. Mr.. Browning succeeds no
better in his opposition 10 the third section Of the
Amendment and incorrectly says thatt "disfranchses
the great majority of the educated men OF the States
which have been in rebellion and excludes them from
any participation in the State and Federal Govern
ments, and the entire control of the government Of
those States will DO placed in the hands of mesger
majority Of the men at all qualified for such control,
and they, as general thing, not Of the most inte-
gent and capable classes" Now We have published
the Amendment about seventy times, and yet the
Secretary Of tho Interior does not seem TO
have read il! IL is scarcely necessary 10
tell our readers that the third section
excludes only those who before the Rebellion had
taken an oath" as q member Of Congress, or On
officer of the United States, or as a member Of any
State Legislature or an executive judicial officer
Of any state"-to support the Constitution Of the
United States. Nor Is even this ACKNOWLEDGMENT
permanent, but q two.thirds vote Of Congress may
remove IL.
But not merely to this Amendment but to all
amendments to the Constitution do Mr.. Johnson and
his Secretary object. Mr.. Browning can eco no
good 10 result from the proposed Amendments. sec
much evil. We had better adhere to the form Of
government which our fathers gave US. II 10, in my
judgment, tho most perfect political production Of
human wisdom and patriotism. For three quarters of
century il secured US uneIampled prosperity and at
tho end Of that time enabled 10 6et and overcome
the most stupondous rebellion in the history of ma
tions. Why change IL" whyh Because that very
Rebellion taught ua that the Constitution was not