The Vinton record. [volume] (M'arthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1866-1891, 1868-07-09
DISTINGUISHING Crippled Sol
djerS.

the Ohio Legislature passed a
law DISTINGUISHING disabled
soldiers, just say to them they
tell a plain palpable falsehood.
Dem. Eng.
There is a little game of
bluff for you. We propose TO
prove that our Democratic
Legislature did diJrane1fSe
crippled soldiers, and as the
facts are so plainly set forth in
the Belfontaine Republican, we
clip from that paper the follow
ing:
The statement that "the Dem
ocratic party simply demands
that crippled soldiers shall
vote like other cripples-ac-
cordlng to LAWS false, as we
shall prove
At the Fall election, in 1866,
certain Democratic trustees
refused to receive the votes of
the crippled sold:ers at the
Soldiers Home, in Columbus.
In the following April, the Re-
publican Legislature passed a
law covering the case, applica-
BILE to The soldiers in the Nation.
al Asylum, at Dayton-the
soldiers at the Home in Colum.
bus having been transferred to
the Dayton Asylum. This Law
was in these words:
"SEC. 1. Be 1t enacted1y tie
General Assembly@ tile &a'ot f
Ohio, That the disabled sol.
diers who have been or shall
be received into the National
Asylum for disabled volunteer
soldiers, and who may be citi-
zens Of the United States,
shall be held and deemed to
have their lawful residence in
the county and township in
which said asylum is for the
time being or may be hereafter
located; and shall be entitled
to vote inysuch township and
county, stbject to the provis-
ions of existing laws as to the
time such residence shall have
continued prior to the exercise
OF the elective franchise" m
Thus, it will be seen, this
law simply enacted that the
Asylum should be deemed the
home of these crippled soldiers,
and provided that they should
have the right to vote, "suljsct
to the provisions Of eristing
lascs, as to the time such resi-,
dence shall have continued
prior TO the exercise of the
elective franchise" THUS, a
soldier was required to be a
resident of the township, coun-
ty and State, the same length
of time every other citizen
was so required to be, before
he could vote. In other words,
he had to vote according to
law"
This law, so impartial and
just, was repealed by the pres
ent Democratic Legislature!
And yet the Democratic editors
say they did not disfranchise
crippled soldiers.
This law, passed by the Re,
publican Legislature, simply
secured these soldiers in their
rights, which Democratic trus.
tees had called in question:
Why was it repealed, unless to
disiIrahc cihise them?
And why does a Democratic
Legislature seek to disfrpn.
c!,ise crippled soldiers. They
are white, and it cannot be on
account of their color. They
are native Americans, aud ii
cannot be. on account of their
birth. They were required TO
comply with the laws, defining
the length of time required to
become a residennt voter, and
it could not be because they
we're non-residents. They are
men of sound minds and good
character, and are not disfran-
chised a, imb eciles or criminals.
Why then are they diSfran.
chised? Two reasons only can
be given, and these, mean as
they are, are consistent with
the character Of the party that
repealed the law, and are most
certainly the reasons that actu.
ated the Democratic Legisla-
ture in its shameful course.
/. The Democracy esteem
a soldier who was crippled in
the service of his country (and
is thus thrown upon its boun-
ty) a pauper-and they diSfran-
chised him as they would the
inmate OF our county infrma.
ries. Instead of honoring the
nations heroes, they spurn