The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-10-05

the author of il. But il is somewhat remarlsa-
BILE that Mr. Trumbull should eIhaustively
discuss those clauses of the Constitution
which have never been supposed to confer this
power, and maintain profound silence upon
the single clause which it is claimed does con-
fer the power.
The Constitution provides
l. That electors of members of Congress
shall have the qualifications requisite for cleo
tors of the most numerous branch of the
State Legislature; and
II. That Congress shall have power to
''male or alter" the regulations Of the
States" concerning "the time, place, and man
ner'' of electing representatives.
Mr. Madison, in the Virginia Convention,
explained this to mean that while it was
deemed desirable that each StateRshould in the
first instance regulate the right of suffrage for
itself, yet, to prevent the right from being
granted or denied in such a manner as would
endanger the safety and perpetuity of the
General Government, it was deemed advisable
to invest Congress with the ultimate or ap-
pellate power to alter or amend the regula-
tions of the State respecting suffrage, as it
might be found essential to the national well
fare. He admitted, in response to
question addressed to him by Mr.. Jeffer-
son, that this clause would give Con-
gress the power even to pass a national uni
| form suffrage law, but affirmed that such
power might be necessary to preserve
| the very existence of the Government. Mr..
Trumbull is not only silent upon the authority
in question, but upon the clause of the Consti-
| tation on which Mr.. Madison based his con-
structiOn. In taking the position that ga re-
| publican government does not depend upon
the number of the people who participate in the
| primary election of representatives" we sup
pose Mr.. Trumbull would be understood to
argue that the question whether government
ic or moi Of fho
number of people who are made voters. But
| this assertion, if true, proves too much. We
might narrow the suffrage to one man, as is
| practically done in all absolute despotisms,
and yet this would be republic.
| Mr.. Madison defined the difference between
/ democracy and a republic to be that in the
| former 'the people meet and exercise the gov
ernment in person; in republic they assem-
| BILE and administer it by their representatives
| and agents." In either case it must be the
| people, T. e., the whole people, I. e., all adult
males not disfranohised for personal causes
/ who take part in the government. Whatever
may have been called republics centuries ago,
| to-day history and usage have identified the
word with those governments only which are
'of the people, for the people, and by the
people"
Mr.. Trumbull attempts to prove that in a
republic black citizens may be excluded from
| the suffrage by citing the example of various
States. But this is assuming that those States,
in that respect, have been republican, which is
begging the question. He might as well prove
| that the black race in America have always
been free, by citing from the Declaration of
| Independence that "all men are created equal,
and have an inaienable right to liberty"
| The, slave State governments have no more
| been republican than the slaves have been
| free. There were sections of territory and
classes of people in the United States upon
| which neither the Constitution nor the Decla-
| ration of Independence had any practical
| operation; and if the inspiration contained in
| those documents had been always ''cribbed,
| cabined, and confined within the brains OF
conservatives and strict constructionists, we
doubt if either of them would at present have
any practical operation anywhere; some strict
constructionist would doubtless be presiding
as the Gar over that kind of model republic
which Mr.. Trumbulrs airy imagination has
| devised, and in which none but the Gear would
| vote. ..