The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-11-09
WASHINGTON GOSSIP.

New York Ia Receie from Jts Ratification Of
the Fifteenth AInendment--views of Repub-
l1cnns and Democrats OH the Right 10 DO
S0-Abstract OF tine Fr.ends' Report OH the
Indian QneSsioa--Vhat They Recommend us
Necessary Remedies.
WASHINGTON, Nov. 8, 1859.
The overwhelming democratic victory in New
York State and the good working majority secured
IN the Legislature have again revived the knotty
question Of the power OF a State to recede from Its
TO an amendment to the United States consti-
tuition while yet such amendment has not received
the ratification OF hree-fourths OF the States Of the
Union. The Legislature Of your State has already
rati0ed the fifteenth amendment, and Governor
HOFFMAN has certified that fact by an OIL
cial communication to the State Department.
Tie point now raised Is whether the state OF New
York has contaminated Its acton on the amend
ment by the fact OF ratification and formal certn.
cation OF the fact TO the central government, or
whether the Legislature TO meet next January win
have the power TO undo the action of Its predeces-
s0r and recall the ratification the hands of the
Secretary Of State Republican politicians generally
hold that New York has lost its control over the
subject; that II was called upon to perform an
Affirmative act and has done So and that whatever
right 1t might have mad to receda--a right which
they say Is extremely doabtfui under any circuni-
stances--has been lost by the action OF Governor
Hoffman In transmitting to the Secretary OF State
certttication OF the ratification. That act, they
contend, stops tho next or any future Leg,sla-
ture oil the state from reccding. The democrats
nod an entirely opposite ground ON tho subject.
They argue That unti the required number OF State
legislatures shall have asseated TO the Amendment
any legislature which may have ratified 1t Is ut
liberty to recede, even though Secretary OF state
may have been notified as required by law. They
say that no one doubts tAe power OF a legislature
TO raty. even though It's predecessor may have re-
fused TO raufy. II then subsequent legislature
may upset the negative action OF It's predecessor
why may 1t not also upset tho affirmative action /
The rule, they contend ought 10 WORK both WAYS.
OHIO, with democratic Legislature repudIated the
fifteenth amendment but the next Legislature OF TINT
the amendment. And say the democrats, tho al
ADMINISTRATION WIN not deny the authority OF the next
ONO Legislature 10 take this step. why, then
@noulu tue administration deny 10 New York the
vGht 10 recede rom an affirmative action while IL
pncedes to ohio the rignt to Iecede from mega
Il yer
Y ~ pretty icklish point, no doubt, and article
nvevoi the constitution, which treats OF tie subject
Oh aSsshdments, is worded IN such way to
lhrolV very llttle gdt The question. IL merely
plovtve tnat congress, Whenever two.thirds OF
both htskies shah deem it necessary shall propose
nmenunh1n,s 70 this constitution or, ON tho appMca
ZION Oh tlA legislatures two-thrds OF tue several
states, snini cal convention for proposing amend
mems, WINCH IN either case shall be valid 10 an IN
.eu1 Hnu purposes as part OF this constitution
when ratified by the LEGISLATURES of threeiourtna OF
~. sesoral sL@vs or by The conventions IN three.
The constitution therefore, would seeu, 20 bc s,ert
pn Inc POINT " nsVreu declares waon n ratidcaton