Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1868-01-06
RECONSTRUCTION.
letter from Ex-U. q. Senator
Fitzpatrick, of Alabama.
i'm Opposition.

tne auOpllOn VI tno constituton iiouSN
by the recent Convention at Mont
gomery. have at no time said or done
anything that could be so construed, and
you do me injustice in supposing that
such report Of my opinions is mis-
representation. No man can be more
decided in his opposition to the ratifica-
ton of that instrument than have been
and am now.
can scarcely conceive greater
calamity to our people than the adoption
of this constitution. 1t gives all the
former slaves over the age of twenty
one years in the State the right to vote
and takes that right away from the
thousands of white men.
Every white man who has held office
| and taken an oath TO support the Con-
stitution of the United States, and in any
way aided the South in the unfortunate
conflict between the two setions, is put
under the ban and deprived Of the cleo
tive franchise. | was opposed to seces-
sion as you know. | was in the United
States Senate, and believing | had no
right to remain there after the State did
secede, / left that body and returned
home. am disfranchised by this Con :
stitution now submitted for the approval
of the people. have remained at home
a quiet, peaceable citizen ever since.
left the Senate, but | can vote neither for
nor against the Constitution, though all
the slaves l formerly owned, who are
| twenty-one years old, are allowed to vote
/ mention my own case simply to illus
trate a similar condition of thousands oi
others in the State who can have no voice
| in making a constitution or laws under
4 which we are TO live The test oath as
| it is generally called, is odious. All per
sons, before they can vote, must take an
oath to support the constitution and laws
| OF the United States and the constitution
and laws of the State of Alabama. Who
is so wise as to know all the laws of the
! Unitad States and tkis State go es &c. cchh- T.
serve his oath? When and where in thii
country was it ever required for men t.
incur such odious obligations to enable
them to exercise the right heretofore o
an American citizen? After the close o
our revolutionary struggle the victorious
Wings of that day gave us the Constitu
| ton of the United States under which
the country Aourished So long and thu
people lived so happily. Do you find il
that Constitution any oath required lik,
the one now necessary to enable mar
to vote2 The Wings, if we are to believe
/ history, entertained most deadly hosti
i ity to what was then called the Tory
party. Did these Wings, in making thu
Constitution of the United States, or any
of the State Constitutions, require sucf
an oath from either Wing or Tory2 Not q
| all. Are VIC growing better Or wiser thai
the powerful intellects that brought thi
Government into existencef fear not
| This test oath further provides tina
before any one can vote he must als'
swear that he accepts the civil ant
political equality of all men, and agree
not to attempt to deprive any person o.
persons on account of race, color, Of
,reviess condition, of any political ol
ci vii right, privilege or immunity, en-
10y ed by any other class OF men. The
Con. .gtitution or General Assembly
might declare the civil or politica
equality of all, but to require voter to
swear that he accepts it, and virtually
that he will never attempt to alter 1t
| before he can vote, is species OF legis
lation unknown to this country. 1t II
true that it is further provided IN th'
| Constitution "that the General Assembly
shall have power to remove the disability
of certain classes now disqualified from
voting" but where will you lind power
to relieve any one who takes this oath
Once taken the obligation remains flxec
during his lifetime on the man who
incurs it. Such legislation l regard al
at war with the civilization OF the age II
which we live.
l am as willing as any are to see The
colored population educated, and this,
believe, is the common sentiment OF oui
people; but how will the system pro
posed work in practice DO you be-
lieye, if the parents and guardians OF the
| children of the two races were willing
they should be sent to the same school,
that they could be kept and taught
together in harmony? / do not. In
the Constitution no provision is made
for separate schools. Why did not the
Convention provide separate schools and
let each be taught separately L have
lived all my life with mixed popul lation,
the slaves and whites of the South, and
my deliberate conviction is, you might
as we'll try to mix oil and water without
chemical agents, as to attempt TO teach
the children of the two races together.
In the portions of the State where the
colored population greatly predominates,
the whites will virtually be excluded
and in other sections, where the whites
are in the majority, the same result will
befall the blacks, producing disorder
aud deadly feuds between the two races
Without giving in detail my objections
to the ratification of the Constitution
for they are too numerous to mention
in this letter. will say that the effect
of many of its provisions is to elevate
the black by degrading the white race.
The Constitution is not only proscrip-
tive in many Of its provisions, DC: !;
places to a great extent the property Of
the country at the mercy of the nom
property holders-a lementable condi-
ton for any people.
liz is said BY some that it was made to
keep down rebellion. What have the
people of the South to commence or
carry on rebellion with2 Our slaves are
all set free; our fields barely cultivated
under the new system Of labor, and
many of them grown up in briarss and
weeds since emancipation, and almost
everything in a state Of dilapidation and
decay. The cry for bread which comes
/ up from aemost every hill and valley IN
the State mas scarcely ceased ringing IN
our Ars, and it was only hushed by the
liberal donations from the beaeyolent Of