The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1868-10-07
Democratic sophisms.

Democratic journals, like the New York
World, are continually affirming that the en-
franchisement of colored citizens is the dis
franchisement of the white citizen. This is
the Worlds statement; viz: let it be here
repeated, that in one form or another, dis
franchisement is the inevitable concomitant
in the reconstructed South of disbelief in
negro. equality" The article from which
this extract comes is entitled the Suffrage
Sophism." We denominate all such state
ments as Democratic sophisms. f
The first sophism is that equality and
Suffrage are used as interchangeable
terms-words meaning the same thing. Now,
the editor of the World knows that when he
gives the ballot to the denizens of Five
Points, and marches side by side with them
to the polls, and that too when he must ac-
knowledge that they, and such like them,
constitute the strength of his party in New
York city, that he does not cOncede to them
equality; neither socially, intellectually or
morally does he consider them his equals.
The affirmation that he comedies such equal
ity, he would regard and resent as an insult.
Democrats in these Southern States are per.
petually, loudly and pathetically inviting
colored men to vote with them; and doubt
less, if the colored voters would, in a body,
vote the Democratic ticket, the members OF
that party would promise, and probably
guarantee them, the right of suffrage. By SO
doing, do they concede negro equaity2 In
past time, when free colored men voted in
this State, was negro equality acknowledged?
If not then, why now2
Again, if suffrage is equality, how does it
work the disfranchisement of white men
Equality is the possession of the same rights,
privileges and opportunities, by all the par
ties concerned. Instead of DISTINGUISHING
white men, colored men are taken into part
nership with them.
View the sophism in another light. Free
dom was granted the black man; did that
act enslave the white man. Certainly it did,
if enfranchising the black man DISTINGUISHES
the white man.
Again. Enfranchising the colored man
transfers no political right from the white
man to the black man. The white man
stands exactly as he did before. The black
man is admitted to an equal participation
with him in certain civil rights. Nothing
more --.E-
The second sophism, viz: Suffrage is
mastery" "Whenever man is brought in
to the body polite he becomes to the extent
of his suffrage, the master of all other men
in it."
This is sophistry. For if suffrage is mas
terry, then it is not equality. The writer
contradicts himself He has been strenuous
ly asserting, and pretending to argue, that
suffrage is equality. He now contradicts
himself, and argues to the contrary. To be
sure he has endeavored, by raising dense
cloud of dust, to conceal his change of base,
but in vain. The sophistry will out. If he
is right now, he was wrong before. If he
he was right before, he is wrong now. ..-
Again If suffrage is mastery" then to
confine suffrage to a class is to make suffrage
tyranny. Such restriction of suffrage
creates master class. 1t commits to class
arbitrary power All history shows that the
result of such process is tyranny. Either
the World is in favor of establishing and
perpetuating tyrannical aristocracy, or he is
arguing against himself Universal suffrage
is guarantee against tyranny, because,
with universal suffrage there can be no mas
ter class instead of tyrannical aristocracy
we may have genuine Democracy.
The World says, when man is admitted
to the body polite he becomes, to the extent
of his suffrage, the master of all other men
in it. Not so; he only becomes master of
himself; and only until he is admitted to
the body polite can the citizen be really mas
ter of himself. Outside of the body polite
he is subject-with no sure means of de-
fence or redress against any behest of the
body polite. Within the body politic he
wields weapon which executes free.
mans will, as lightning does the will of God
Within the body polite the citizen is moi
the master of any other citizen-he is simply
the political peer of every other citizen. As
far as political rights are concerned, each citi
zen has the same right to consult and to ac1
Tor his own interests as every other. He il
not the master of anybody, and he has powe,
to see that nobody becomes his master.
One word farther, as to the misrepresenta
tions of the Democratic press. Many at the
North, are led to-believe that for the purpose
OF enfranchising. black men, white men have
beer disfanchised.
The Constitution of this State disfranchis
es no American citizen who previous to an
election has resided twelve months in the
State, and is not guilty of Infamous crime
Not even rebels are DISTINGUISHED. Such is
the truth and we do solemnly protest against
the representation that white men in this
State are oppressed by being denied the
rights of freemen. ''''
White men have the ballot and there is
no power that can take it from them with
out their consent. Indeed there is no dispo-
sition on the part of any class in the State to
deprive them of it. 5e -oerN"ta
-. Z lLI - Challenge. Z u s. ~ u
The sum 81 900 will be bet that General
GRANT will he elected naxt proo;don+ of A. ,