Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-09-22
HOW THE FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT
WAS PASSED IN THE SENATE.

1t may not be generally remem-
bered that the proposed fifteenth
amendment to the constitution of
the United States, was forced
through the Senate under pressure
of the party lash, and if those who
voted for it under protest had voted
their honest convictions, it would
have been defeated. The history
of the adoption of this measure
shows how the Radicals have cal
ried their usurpations in almost eve"
nv instance. The more honest
and conscientious of the party have
been forced into the support OF
measures against which they con-
scientiously revolted, simply be-
cause the party demands required
such a course Of them. The pur
pose of the fifteenth amendment
was to force negro suffrage upon
States it was felt sure would not
confer the right upon the negro.
1t had been a cardinal principle
with all parties from the foundation
of the government that the regula~
tion of the elective franchise proper
ly belonged to the States, and this
principle was clearly recognized in
the platform of the Chicago Con-
yention, which nominated Gen.
Grant for President. Gen. Grant
had not been inaugurated before the
party that clamored at Chicago for
the right of the States to regulate
the elective franchise, insisted that
the States should yield this right to
Congress, so that the Radical party
would have it in their power to so
control the elections as to re-
tain their ascendancy in Congress
for many years to come. The hiss
tory of the passage by the United
States Senate Of the proposed fiji
teenth amendment establishes this
position. The measure was passed
in the Senate by thirty nine to thlr-
teen, and there were fourteen Sena-
tors absent and not voting. Upon
this the Cincinnati Gazette Of March
3, 1869, made the following com"
ments: off those who voted for
the amendment under protest had
| voted against it, it would have
| failed. AS it was, the affirmative,
while il was two-thirds of the Sen
ate pressat, was not two.thirds of
the whole Senate, but it was ruled
that two thirds Of the Senators
present complied with the constitus
tionaI provision The fact was
that nearly all the fourteen absen-
rec Senators were in Washington,
and refused to vote On purpose.
They could not honestly sustain
! it, and they had not the cour-
age to break with their party
upon it. Had they voted &C
cording @ their sentiments, ii
would have been defeated by not
receiving a two-thirds majority.
4 Among the Senators who refused
| to vote were some carpet-baggers
from the South, and Senator'S from
the Pacific States, who were OPP
posed to it on account of letting in
the Chinese. In tho debate Mr..
Warner, of Alabama, a carpet-bag-
ger from Ohio, who voted for it,
tsaid: al most respectfully but
earnestly, enter my humble pro test
against the character Of the amend
ment. While / shall probably vote
for it in the shape it is, shall do it
rather in Difference 10 the judgment
of older and wiser men than my
self, than in accordance with my
| deliberate Judgment" Mr.. Ed
munds, of Vermont, a Leading Re
publican Senator, Sustained from
voting for it the following cogent
reasons: 4
at ia repugnsnt. Mr.. President, to All
NV notions of free goyerI ment: IL ls
repupnant, know, to alt the notions Of
The peopIe whom | represent, as entering
into the framework and heart Ct the gov
ernment that Processes IL be, and can oni =
be called, a republican one.
As have eaid, believe il TO be Injurious
TO the government, if it is carried out
| believe it to be an outrage upon the
good sense and patriotism Of the country,
/ - Ill I a. Iat