The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-06-17
REMOVED.

denial of the suffrage to the negroes of the
United States by Federal legislation. The
denial of the suffrage to the blacks would be
not one whit more repulsive to the World than
is its forcible impositionupon them by Federal
power. Its hostility is the same in either case,
because the reason for that hostility is in
either case the same. To confer the suffrage
franchise or to deny it, is equally lawless
violation of the right of all the States, each for
itself, to distribute the franchise as its people
elect to do. New York repels the right of
Delaware to say, or have avoice in saying,
how she shall apportion this trust, and Cali
fornia, with her Cinnamon, repels the control
of Florida, with or without her negroes.
If the Times and other Republican journals,
therefore, have not determined entirely to
eschew fairness and candOr in political contro-
versy, they will hereafter take pains to repre-
sent the Democratic party as opposed to the
denial of negro suffrage by Federal law no less
than to its imposition by Federal law.
AS we have already said, the World and the
Democratic party recognize facts and the logic
of facts with quite as clear an intelligence as
their opponents. They do not need to be told
whittier events are tending. They see. They
do not need the Times to inform them that the
Rebellion and the consequences of the Rebellion
(am0ng which, perhaps, the most direful is
the nconstitutionalizing of a great political
party, and its transformation from the odious
form OF a sectional partyto the stillmore odious
shape Of revolutionary party) have put
ballots into the hands of all the adult male
negroes of the South, which neither Federal
power nor State power will hereafter be able
to withdraw from their hands, even were it
desirable.
This enormous change in our political
dynamics nullifes any previous decision in
any Northern State regarding negro suffrage
ode a all Gnoh dpoicinno Iox L
made, before this monstrous change had taken
place, in state Of facts which has now ceased
to exist. The conclusions of the New York
Constitutional Convention of 1876, conferring
upon our negro citizens suffrage with a pro-
perty limitation, can haTc and should have no
control over the Constitutional convention OF
1867. All things are changed; anu political
wisdom then is no more likely to be wisdom
now than an agriculture suited to the car
boniferous flora would be likely to produce
great crops from the existing vegetable world.
We express the wishes of every enlightened
Democrat, therefore, when we say that it is
the duty of the Constitutional Convention
now in session at Albany, to submit to the
people of this State (not to the Republican
n. .aiority in Congress), to be voted upon, this
matter OF the extension of the voting fran
chise, IIey are the competent and lawful
Judges whether or not and how much or how
little, the franchise shall be extended; and our
political circumstances have so changed since
the matter was last submitted to their deci-
sion, that there is great propriety in its being
now again submitted toG Gtheir revision. In
deed, it is a question of so much Importance,
that the will on the people of the State ought
not to be preiudt,7ed or imperilled by the pos
sible failure of the Convention to make Con-
stitution suited to their wants. Even if the
new Constitution were to be rejected by the
people, their free consfde ration and unbiased
decision of the question Of the extension of the
voting franchise ought to be insured by its
separate submission.