Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1868-02-21
son motion of Mr.. EVANS, the Senate
took recess.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Nh. wooDwoRTH's REsoIurIoN.

AFTERNOON SESSION.
Nh. wooDwoRTH's REsoLuTIoN. II
Mr.. CONANT moved to take, up Mr..
Woodworth's resolution relative e. re-
questing. the committee on the Judiciary
to report forthwith the Senate bill to pre-
scribe the duties of judges of election In
certain cases, and to preserve the purity
of ELECTIONS, which was agreed to;I when
Mr. MAY renewed the motion to indeh-
nitely postpone the resolution.
Mr.. W0ODWORTHop opposed the motion,
to withhold, for mere partisan purposes,
the bill which had been referred to them
some four weeks ago. He proceeded 70
speak In opposition to the bill named
In the resolution, urging that 1t was
both unjust and unconstitutional. The
bill could not change the provision OF the
State Constitution in regard to the right OF
suffrage, to which the Supreme Court had
given a construction. The Democratic
party had been great sticklers for adherence
to Constitutions, and to the decisions of
Supreme Courts. Why not be consistent
and sustain the decisions of our own Su-
preme Court upon this constitutional ques-
tion? Should this bill pass both branches
of the Legislature, 1t would be merely nu-
gatory and void. Should the bill pass, at
the very first election held afterward, it
would be declared unconstitutional and
void.
Mr.. SWoodworth demanded whether
1t was Democratic or Republican; whether
1t was just or right, to legislate against
any respectable class Of our fellow citizens.
10 enforce his argument, he referred to
the different nationalities represented in
our country. He wanted to know if the
mental inferiority of the negro was to be
held as valid reason for denying him the
right of suffrage. He admitted that the
black men in Ohio were ignorant; but SO
were many white men,. The patriotism OF
the, blacks In the recent war exceeded thar
of many thousands OF white men in our
State. Mr.. w. pronounced a warm eulo-
GUM upon the gallantry of the colored
volunteers in the late war, and argued al
great length in favor of the equal political
rights, including the right of suffrage, ol
the blacks with white men.
Mr.. HUTCHESON said that If the propo-
sition had come from him as the author Of
the bill, to have the committee report il
back, he might have been justified in urg-
ing it in a speech. The Senator from Ma
honing (Mr. Woodworth) had two occa.
sions In which he might have shown his op-
position to the bill. The first was when
the bill was read the first time, when he
might have moved its rejection. The 9th.
er was when the bill was read the second
and was referred to the Judiciary commit
tee. But he suffered those occasions to
pass, and now volunteers to call upon the
committee to report back the bill forth
with without recommendation.
Mr.. Hutcheson- referred to the decis
ions of the Supreme Court spoken of by
Mr.. W., and denied that they were as ht
represented them to be. The language o
the old Constitution and the new one o
Ohio, was different in the suffrage clause
the former using the words 'swhite male
inhabitant of the State of Ohio" and the
latter, the words s'white male citizen of the
United States" It was not proper or JUS
tifiable to apply decisions made by the Su.
preme Court under the OLD Constitution to
the new one.
1t is not, therefore, simply question a:
to the construction of the Constitution O.
Ohio, old or new, but whether we have the
power to say who is citizen of the United
States. This he denied. He was free to
say that the Legislature had the right, ir
his opinion, to pass laws of this kind, not
withstanding any decision of our State
court. Suppose the Supreme Court has
decided, or may hereafter decide, law like
the proposed one unconstitutional, the de.
cisions of courts are not permanent
any more than the sentiments or politica
complexion oflegislatures. Let the courl
pass on cases arising under this law as Otter
as they please, am for enacting it as my
understanding of the Constitution until 8
change is effected which will represent the
feelings of the people of Ohio. But sup
pose we put it on the ground of judieia
authority. Our own courts have always
been divided. The reason and learning
were, in his opinion, with the dissenting
judges. 1t is the reasoning of the Judges
which he will regard as a legislator, mo-
the decision, whereas the decisions of othel
States he referred to on the same subject
had been against our Supreme Court ant
their reasoning far inferior. He referred
to the Dred Scott case as the highes
authority in existence as to who Is citizeI
of the United States, aud that is in suppor
OF the provisions OF the bill. Its reasoning
was the best on the subject he had evel
read. And whether we take these other de
cisiOns, especially of the Supreme Court o
the United States, as authority or light
merely on the question, the argument il
against the Senator from Mahoning. w,
make the foreigner undergo the probation
of naturalization for five years, because
then he can only be citizen of the Unite(
States; but the construction of the Senator
would enable the SENT arbarian Negro
from Southern plantation to vote in on,
year.
He believed the people who sent us her,
would not be satisfied if we did not d.
something to prevent negro voting in Ohio
Mr.. H. was not disposed to abandon
JuC PIIuClplCS vi tHC Uill, WudlcvcT buc re
port of the committee might be. The Sen.
ator (Mr. W.) had said that the bill was re
pugnant to the sense of justice of major
ity of the people of Ohio. A majority O
forty thousand against negro suffrage a
the last election was some evidence a
least to the contrary. The Legislature
as well as the Supreme Court, had the righ
to give construction to constitutional
provisions. Mr.. 81. referred to conflicting
of rf tI
subject under discussion. He closed witt
the hope that the committee would be al.
lowed to report the bill at their own con
venience.
Mr.. EVERETT thought the decisions O
the Supreme Court ought to settle this suf
frage question: The Senator from Maho
ming (Mr. Woodworth) had taken tn,
right legal view. The bill in question
should be reported back, for he Mr.. E.
had desire to vote against it. Its passag,
would be disgrace to the State and tn,
age. He was anxious, for one, to see gen
tlemen face their principles, and pu
themselves upon the record in favor O
this BILL The dictionary of our languag.
had been assailed because it contained thu
word loyal" In the law for work on tn,
highways there was 10 distinction between
white and black. Black men could pay
taxes, but they must be kicked away from
the polls.
Mr. MAY did not regard this as tn,
proper time to discuss the merits of the bill
referred to in the resolution. There wer,
several gentlemen on the committee of tn,
same political party with the mover of tn,
resolution, and they had never mooted tn,
question of reporting back the bill. II
many of the Northern States the right O
colored men to suffrage had been denied
Mr.. May made some further remarks, ant
when he had concluded, i.5.e
The vote was taken on the motion to in
definitely postpone the resolution, and wa
agreed to by the following vote:
YEAs-Messrs. Berry, Campbell, Carter
Dickey, Dowdney, Emmitt, Evans, God
frey, Golden, Hutcheson, Jamison, Kenney
Lawrence, Linn, May, Rex, Scribner, Win
iner-1S.