The Plymouth weekly Democrat. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1860-1869, 1867-03-07
establishment Of PrOytsiSeas
Government in the SC.si;,.


ing TO Justify ones own wrong because
some person or person. had also done
wrong. So far as mere party manage,
ment is concerned. the handful of Demo
Gratis in the House erred by aldiug Thad.
deus Stevens to defeat motion to order
the main question on the Sherman Sen.
ate bill. The result is known. But be.
cause different action might have result
ed in a fat refusal Of the House to agree
to the bill, it does not follow that when
that body proceeded TO fix upon it the ut
| terly unconstitutional provisions territo>
rialziug the States excluded from repre-
sentation in Congress, Democrats Of tue
House could possibly suppose that Nh
Sherman would take such serpent to his
bosom.
The constitutional amendment provides
for the exclusion from Office of what were
known as leading rebels. But it does not
inhiN,t them from voting. But Mr.. Sher>
man, in agreeing 10 the House amendment
turned his back on the only way OF affect
ing Sta.es-namelY, ty constitutional
amendment-and voted Tor an act which
will exclude from suffrage multitudes Of
white men those who have held office.
executive or judicial and are therefore
the best men of the State. We have the
authority Of the best Union men Of Vir-
ginia for saying that under such pros
pectiye bill a convention can not be raised
in that State to frame new constitutions,
nor can suitable persons be found to fill
the Offices with credit to the community.
In this respect the bill looks to the eiava>
tion to high trusts of class of pc sons
who have 10 intellectual fitness for po-
sitiuns.
Mr. Sherman's original bill partially
dethroned State authority by exalting the
military over it in certain cases. The
amendment of Mr.. ,,helIabarger, who is
the bitterest as well as the ablest man Of
his party destroys the State authority, so
far as an unconstitutional act may be held
to accomplish such an object. Yet Mr-
Sherman agreed to such on atrocity. We
have heard that he sought TO stife the
conscientious repugnance of many Of the
radicals for this prescription of the best
men in the South by assuming that only a
few thousand persons would he affected
By it, 1t would be nearer the fact to say
few thousand for each considerable
State
But in that haste and violence which
has prevented by gag, by previous ques-
tions, by star chamber secretivencss, and
by protracted sessions, the due considera-
ton Of revolutionary measures, and has
blocked the operation Of the sober second
thought Of the people upon lnelr repre>
sentativcs in Congress, schemes have been
passed through the forms Of legislation,
which were apparently not much compre>
hended. The proof OF this is seen in the
Shellaba~ger amendment to the Sherman
bill. To our knowledge, radical Congress-
men deeply deplore it, but they came in
under the party lash. 1t is the first in
stance within our knowledge that the
Senate has yielded to the House upon a
vital measure upheaying everything like
constitutional barriers
The result can only be attributed to the
lamentable fact of the aggregation of men
in the House of superior ability who are
dovotees of the idea Of southern destruc-
ton. The superior conservative Ropub-
iicans in the House who voted against the
Shellabarger amendment. have been de-
serted by Mr.. Sherman and others profess
ing semiconservatism Who arc the Re-
pubicans Of the House that have been
thus trcacherously treated by Mr.. Sher-
man and the rest who got up the Sherman
bill? They may be seen in the following
list of those who voted against the Sneiia-
barger amendment:
Nays-Messrs. Ancora, Barker, Ben
iamin, Bergen. Bingham, Blaine, Blow,
i yer. Buckland, Campbell. Chandler,
Cooper, Darling, Davis, Dawes, Dawson,
Delano, Denison, Dodge, EIdridse, t'inck,
Glossbrenncr, Goodyear, Harding OF Ken
tucky, liise, Hubbard Of West Virginia,
iIubbell Of New York, Huobell Of Ohio,
Humphrey, Hunter, Kerr, kuykendall,
Dafin, Lawrence OF Pennsylvania, lie
Blond, Leftwich, Marshall, Marvin, Nc
Cullough, Mckee, Mckuer. Miller, Moor
head, Niblack, Nicholson NOEL, Phelps,
Pomeroy, Radford. Randall of Pennsyl
vania Raymond, Rice of Name. Ritter,
Rogers, Ross, Rousseau, Shanklin, Sit
greaves, Stillwell, Strousc, Tabor, Tay lor
of New York, Thayer, Thornton, Trimble,
Ward of Kentucky, Whaloy, Winfield
and Wrght--70.
Had Mr. Sherman taken the course
that he in all honor and integrity might
have been expected to take, he would
have opposed the Honse amendment; but
he has crouched to what is almost the worst
form of chast:sement of the South that
radical hate could devise.
Let US sec what this is by the text:
"ln all elections to any Office unCcr
such provisional government all persons
shall be entitled to vote, and none other,
who are entitled to vote under the provis,
ions of the fifth section of this act, and no
person shall be eligible to any Office under
such provisional government who would
be disqualified from holding Office under
the provisions Of the third article Of sal 4
constitutional amendment"
The only construction that the above
admits Of is, that at the next election, if
not before, in any State, the voters shall
be all negroes, and such of the whites as
are not excluded from holding Office under
the constitutional amendment.
Those who are excluded from holding
office by the constitutional amendment can
not, by the bill, vote for delegates to a
convention to form n new constitution,
which may be got up "by the people" in
the provncialized States OF course there
can be no authentic call for convention
Jy tie people. This phraseology is used