Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-05-20
Negro Suffrage-Disfranc
of HDeSernPr-S.

| of Deser1ers.
| We clip the following from the Columbus
Journal, in which paper we find it credited
to the Mahonimg Register:
| The Democrats are exceedingly indig-
| nant at the proposed disfranchisement OF
/ deserters by the constitutional amendment
/ In this they are tor once consistent. They
constantly encouraged desertion during the
war, and the coward who jumped bounty
or basely skulked off to the rear while his
comrades were facing the enemy in battle.
does not turn to them in vain for sympathy.
| During the tendency of the Negro Suf-
frage Resolution, which finally passed
giving to all male Negroes of lawful age
the right of suffrage, while it attempted to
disfranchise five times as many Whites
the charge was freely made that the latter
as to secure its defeat. 1t was so held by
every member of the Legislature from the
Western Reserve, and as an original prop
osition, they all opposed it. The charge
thus made by the Radicals from Northern
Ohio, was sustained by the fact that the
members, who insisted upon the clause dis
| franchising Whites being made part and
parcel of the Negro Suffrage Resolution,
had but few days before voted against it,
in order to defeat joint resolution allow
ing vote to be taken by the people on the
simple proposition to give to the Negroes
| the right to vote.
| In the State Senate, the proposed disfran-
chisement of deserters was the peculiar
object of Senator KELLoGG's wrath. Hail
=, A,L h,,Io 4
the companion and pupil of JOSHUA R.
GIDDINGs, and alife-long advocate of Ne
gro equality, social and political, he oppos-
ed the disfranchisement of deserters and
those who had visited Canada to elude the
draft, on the double ground that it would
cause many Republicans to vote against
Negro Suffrage, and because the PROPOSE
ticn was in itself wrong, and, if adopted,
would work great injury, which it would
be impossible to reform. His argument on
this latter point was conclusive. =
The terms of the proposed amendment
to the Constitution disfranchises all who
:" have borne arms in support of any insur-
rection or rebellion against the Govern
ment of the United States, or have fled
being drafted into the military service
thereof, or have deserted the military or
naval service of the said Government in
time of war, and have not subsequently
been honorabzy discharged from the same"
This, Mr.. KELLOGG contended, embraced
all who were not ''honorably discharged"
and it included thousands who fought gall
lantly and well during the war. Their
only crime was believing that they had
filled out the term of their enlistment, to
''serve during the war;" when LEE and
JOHNSON surrendered their armies and the
all the forts, arsenals, and places that had
been wrested from it, and with these, the
entire possession of the entire territory OF
the Republic. When given their furlough,
many of these men, who had fought with
GRANT in the battles of the Wilderness, and
before Richmond, and had participated
with SHERMAN in the fatigues and dangers
of his march to the sea, believing their
term of enlistment had expired, failed to
return, and are now branded as ''deserters'
and as such were to be classed with convict
ed and unpardoned thieves and murderers,
and denied the right to vote in the choice of
their rulers. On the authority of Gov.
Cox, who sat by his side while he spoke
his speech, Mr.. KELLOGG declared that the
books of the Adjutant General of Ohio
bore upon it the names of fifteen or seven
teen thousand soldiers as deserters, to be thus
ostracised, a large portion of whom were
as loyal and. as patriotic as any Senator on
the floor A subsequent examination of
the books of the Adjutant General in
creases this list of Ohio deserters to over
twenty-seven thousand, (S60 of them Ne
groes), one-fourth of the entire number
being branded as deserters, and have
not been sshonorably discharged" merely
for being "absent without leave, by hav-
ing overstayed their furloughs." This
latter class, in law "deserters," but not so
in fact, embraces a greater number of
white soldiers, liable to be deprived of the
elective franchise, than is embraced in the
political rights ON an equality with the
Whites. -.A
In support of his declaration that the
clause of the proposed amendment to the
State Constitution which disfranchises
"deserters and skedadlers," would aid in
defeating Negro Suffrage, Mr.. NoRTHwAY,
also from Ashtabula, said that in that hot
bed of Negro Suffrage or of Abolitionism,
it would cause loss of over eight hun
dred votes. So indignant was Mr.. BoYN-
TON, of Lorain, representing as truly as
man could the sentiments of his Oberlin
that he frequently declared
that had he been present, he would have
the Constitution in consequence of its being
hampered with the clause disfranchising
deserters, because of its manifest injustice.
These facts may not be known to the ed
itor of the Register. Such is not the case,
however, with the editor of the Journal
Their truth is known to him, and he will not
rick public censure so far as to deny the
facts we have stated. The Register will thus
See that it is his own party leaders-the
men he oDeys, and for the same reason that
the ''ox knoweth his masters crib"-who
first opposed the disfranchisement of de-
serters, many of them not SO much because
of its injustice, but because it would lose
votes for Negro Suffrage.
The Democratic party, one and indivisi-
BILE, contend that it is wrong because it will
work injury to men unconscious of crime,
and they are unwilling to aisfranehise ~
600 White men, to add some 5000 Negro
votes TO the voting population of the States
and in giving Negroes this right, enable
them to hold Office and to sit on juries. In
a word, the Democratic party believe this
is a White mans government, and is