The union Democrat., 1868-08-08
rhc Fourteenth Amendment.

The Fourteenth Anne ndmcnf
Bythe proclamation of Secretary Seward,
| declaring that the States OF Ohio and New
jersey have no power TO rescind their action
on the l4th Amendment TO tie constitution
tof the United States serious question IS
raised. Is an Amendment to the Constitu-
tion. once adopted, irrevocable? We ask
this question, with regard to an Amendment
lecitimately adopted. 1t of course does not
annlv 10 tie Fourteenth Amendment which
has been ratified by seven of the so called
reconstructed States. The people of those
States have had no voice in the matter and
the entire reconstruction scheme will, we have
no doubt, be declared unconstitutional as
soon as it can be brought before the Supreme
Court for decision. Congress possesses no
more right to regulate suffrage in any State
of the Union than in England or France.
The question of suffrage is spoken of by
George Ticknor Curtis in his "History of the
Origin, Formation and Adoption of the Con-
stitution of the United States, vol. ., page 70
in the following language. ''In no previous
form of the Confederacy had any State pro.
posed to surrender its own control over the
condition of persons within its limits, or its
power to determine what persons should
share 10 the political rights of that commu-
nifty and no State that now took part In the
new effort to amend the present system of
the Union proposed to surrender this control
over its own inhabitants, or sought to acquire
any control over the condition of persons
within any of the other States"
Everybody knows that reconstruction in
the South was begun by Congress assuming
to regulate suffrage in the Southern States,
and comforting the elective franchise on the
negro. That the revolutionary governments
thus established in those States and the rat
iication, by them, of the Fourteenth Amend.
ment result from this unconstitutional action
of Congress. We do not regard the Amend
ment as being worth the paper it is written
upon and think that any State can test its
validity by refusing to recognize it, and
thereby bring it before the Supreme Court
of the United States for final decision.
But still the important question remains
to be answered: Can a State rescind the
adoption Of Constitutional amendment?
Mr.. Seward assumes that it cannot. In the
case of tho l4th Amendment, the Legisla-
lures of the States of Ohio and New Jersey re-
scinded the action of previous sessions of those
bodies before the proposed amendment had
received the sanction of anything like three
fourths of the States. 1t was yet in an inco-
hate condition. If Mr.. Seward's position is
correct our government is mere despotism
of accidental majorities, in the State Legis.
iatures and in Congress, without any remedy
for such evils as exist at present or in time
may be developed. The absurdity of this
position is plain. If the ratification of an
amendment to the Constitution by three
fourths of the States makes it part ofthe fun
damental law why should not the resembling
of such ratification by an equal number of
States be equally as potent? We feel assur.
ed that the 18th Amendment is obnoxious
to majority of the people gilmore than three
fOurhs of the States. 1t was ratified by Leg
islatures elected without reference to the
important principles involved, and THEN ac-
tion in the matter does not represent the will
of their constituents. This system of rati-
flying amendments to the Constitution by
State Legislatures is entirely wrong. They
should he submitted to direct vote of the
people of the several States and then fair
expression of popular will could be obtained.