Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1868-11-25
The Suffrage Question.

was SAID on the question Oh cuHIdSc' OV't
pro and COR And since the election more
decided expression in favor Of impartial sut-
frage has prevailed, than at any former pc
riod S;any y DO have heretofore manifest
ed entire Indifference on the subject, now
are among It's strongest advocates. This
being the case, we viii endearor to present
some of the arguments that may be prgei
against, as well as in favor of. tt,e passare
of an amendment to our National Consti,n.
ton extending th, elective franchise IN ali
citizens OF tie United States.
Ihe theory of our institutions has been.
that the regulation Of the qualifications of
the elective franchise vested in the several
States. The late rebellion, and the subse
quent defiant attitude of the rebels, howev-
er, seems to have forced upon large num-
bers of our citizens, if not on majority of
them, conviction of an incorrectness of the
theory heretofore maintained, and hence
they express themselves as opposed to en-
trusting the regulation of the right of suf-
trage any longer to the respective States
composing the Federal Union. But that
right having heretofore been conceded, the
question arises: Has the time come when
the States should relinquish that privilege,
and the National Government be vested
with full power to declare who shall and
who shall not be included in the body of e.
lectorS? This question will have to be met
and decided in few years at farthest. The
main objections that can he urged against
this transfer of authority from the States
TO the General Government are, that it
would eilfranchise many who are not quail
fed TO exercise intelligently so great and
momentous privilege and that some States
might have forced upon them restrictions
and extensions Of the suffrage to which they
might be unwilling to accede. This NAV be
so; but, will any one pretend to argue that
all who are now invested with the elective
franchise exercise it intelligently, or that all
the States accede cordially TO the restric
tions now in force? On the other hand:
the argument in favor OF vesting the regula
tlon of the franchise in the General Gov
crnment is, that we should thereby gain
uniformity. And why ought the Rebels to
vote in one State and not in another? Why
should manhood suffrage prevail in one
! State, and not in another? Whv should
the ability to read and write, or the pay
ment Of taxes, or the possession of free
hold. be a qualification in one State, and
not in another? The late political battle
| was fought and won for the maintenance
! OF impartial suffrage in the Southern
States. During that contest the opponents
of the principle conteuded that if it was to
be upheld in the South, why should it not
be made uniform throughout the whole
land? Then, if the principle is to prevail |
IN al! the States, why should it not be Sc
cured by constitutional amendment?
But there is another, and more import
ant view Of this subject Many of the late
Rebels labor under disabilities, the sequence
OF their treason. They sought to be freed
scom these disabilities, aud we're anxious to
fasten their tetters upon the colored people. |
But perceiving they would fail in this las |
they did they changed their tactics and
proclaimed that thei. object was not to d.
vest the coiorcd men Of the franchise, but
10 obtain their own rights. 1t is mooted |
question whether it is advisable to insert !
manhood suffrage in the Constitution of the |
United States, against the wishes of nearly |
one half the electoral population of the u /
MON. Such a COURSE might be deemed un-
wise aud inexpedient, before it was ascer
tanned whether it was approved by decided I
majority Of the people Bet if the oppo
nents of manhood suffrage would assent 70
| the incorporation OF a provision into Our
National Constitution. which would at once
guarantee the right Of the elective franchise,
so far as TO participate in the choice of mem
bers of Congress and Presidential electors,
to all men in the Union, regardless of color,
creed or past condition, and that they only
forfeit that right in case of future rebellion
and treason, or for crime against the laws.
We might ird in such an amendment an ad
justment of al! controversies The Consti-
tulions of several of the Southern States
contain provisions deemed necessary in order
TO protect the Freedmen and punish trea-
son. Could that protection be secured in
another way--by remitting the penalties iu-
posed on treason, and, at the same time, es-
tablishing manhood suffrage in all the States
would it not be preferable to do so?
And now, having presented this subject