The States and Union. [volume] (Ashland, Ohio) 1868-1872, 1869-06-30
The Speech of Governor Hayes.

We published yesterday, in full.
Says the Cincinnati Enquirer tho
speech of Governor Hayes. Whatev
er force there was in it has been spread
before our readers. We propose, il
this article, to review some of its sail
ent points. The General quotes, in
conclusion, an act of the Congress o.
the United Stafes, which recognizes,
apparently, the reconstruction acts
The fact is suppressed that the Dem.
ocratic members of Congress, while
voting for the law, declared expressly
that they were opposed to it in prin-
ciple, and that it was obnoxious to
their views, but that they voted for ii
on the ground that if it did not pass
q still more Objectionable and string
ent measure would become Il law
General Hayes, rs we have said, says
nothing of this, but, on the contrary,
claims it as q merit that the bill in
question received the support of a ma
jority of the Democracy in Congress.
This is political thimble-rigging.-
There is not a shyster in the Police
Court who would be guilty of it. AMI
expect afterward to be recognized, ii
any manner, as a gentleman. 1t is
pe~ttifogging Of the mcanest and basest
character. s-
The Governor, i'll his structures up
on the Democratic majority in the Leg
islature, makes it point against them
that they made an effort to rescind
the ratification of the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution
Now, that ratification had not been
counted. The Legislature that ratifi-
ed it was chosen before its Endorsement
by Congress. 1t was perfectly legal
and appropriate for a new Legislature
to rescind it. 1t had a good prece-
dent before it-that of the repeal of
the celebrated Corwin Amendment to
the Constitution, which Hayes, among
supported. In questioning the
of the Fourteenth Amendment
to the Constitution, he therefore at
lacks the record of his own party
Besides, the people of Ohio had al
ways opposed negro suffrage, yet they
had been represented upon negroes
and upon white women and children
in the Federal Congress. They could
not be presumed to be in favor of a
change which might cause them the
loss of a member or two of the House
Representatives.
The Governor then attacks the Dem
ocratic Legislature, because ii enacted
that those who had visible admixture
Of negro blood should not vote. Why |
should they? The Constitution ofthe
State declares that none but white cit
zens shall have the right of suffrage.
by a majority of fifty thousand,
1t the very election in which the Leg
stature of 1867 was chosen, had voted
hat no negroes, and none known as
negroes, should vote. In its action,
therefore,, it followed popular instruc-
The Governor next condemns the
ct which requires the veterans in the
Home, as well rs all other
to vote in the precincts Or
owns to witch they belong, instead of
hose where they are temporarily at
he time the election takes place. Is T,
OF this act right in principle? Why
hould one man have a special privi-
,ge above another? A merchant who
away from his residence, or a me-
hanic or laborer, has to return to his
.oting-place OIL lose his vote; and can ]
ny II tell us why a soldier or a stu
ent should have additional privileges, {
nd be permitted to cast his vote diff &
rent from other citizensl Yet, this {
the position assumed by Hayes. ,
The Governor makes it q point a
the Democratic party that it 1
not i'll favor of economy in the ex-
of the Government. Now, G