Oregon Republican. [volume] (Dallas, Or.) 1870-1872, 1870-08-27

Eastern journals the subject, In which he
| takes ground that the proposed measure is
tirely in harmony with the Constitution, being
fully authorized by the latest amendment to
that instrument. of course Senator Sumner
will be able to produce prodigious array of
learned arguments to support his doctrine; but
there few persons VIII o can be convinced
that a clause of the Constitution which does
not contain the most distant allusion to suf-
frage grants the power to Congress which the
Senator claims. Until the Constitution ia
amended still further, the power Of regulating
the suffrage must remain where it has resided
heretofore. The Senate is known to be almost
unanimously opposed to Summers plan, and it
is doubtful whether another Senator can be
found who will vote with him on the question
he raises. There is not the smallest probable
ity of the adoption of such measure. But in
one particular relating to suffrage, the Nation
| al Constitution could be amended with advau-
tage. The right to prescribe the qualifications
OF electors of members of Congress and of the
Electoral College should belong to Congress;
the right to regulate all other elections belongs
naturally to the States and should not be dis
turbed The first is wholly national matter
the last concerns the States only, and is of no
interest to the General Government. Here
should be the dividing line between National
and State authority on the subject. The SOW
ereignty of each should extend to everything
rightiul powers. An amendment Of this sort
would have a chance of being considered by
the people but proposition like Summers
will not receive serious attention anywhere.
In its columns Of May 30th, same
year, and just prior TO the election of
Is s, We find this:
"Thc Union party has never taken the
hnf haaf fho -Sn
late the suffrage in the loyal States, and there
fore the Chicago platform declares that "the
question of suffrage in all loyal States proper
| ly belongs to the people of those States"
May 90, 1866, the Oregonian said {:
"The Herald impudently lies when 1t says
| Summers proposition to secure suffrage to the
negroes in the late rebelieus States had been
| agreed upon in caucus. The fact is, his suf-
/ frage proposition has been rejected by the Re-
| construction Committee, it being agreed that
the question of suffrage should be left to the
! States respectively. The me mbers OF Congress
have repudiated the negro suffrage idea at sew
eral different times during the present session.
| The Union party Of the United States has re-
pudlated it. That party is.no for negro suf.
frage."
And on May 30, 1868, few days
before the election, the editor, in speak
ing of the reconstruction on the plan
of negro suffrage, said:
at was a measure not of choice but of ne
cessity. We therefore repeat that the Herald
'impudently lied when it asserted that in May.
1865, that Congress was seeking prctext to
enforce negro suffrage on the South"
May the 18th, 1866, the Oregonian
says:
"How mauifestly dishonest, then, is it for
Democrats TO use the name Of President John
sou to aid them in securing political victory
claiming that he is opposed to negro sutira age
The truth is Congress has never declared in Tn
vor of giving the ballot to the negro, while
the President has done Even IL il were
true that the Radicals were in favor of it
wherein would they differ this matter from
| Mr.. Johnson?"
Is that SO, Mr.. Oregonian. IF il is
then you simply prove that Presiden,
johnson was right, and the Union par
ty then was wrong, aud that to-day yor
are the convert OF "Andy."
November 23d, 1867, its editor said
"Congress hesitated long before giving th,
blacks suffrage, and only did it when il wa
clear there was no other way to put down th
rebel element"
Was it necessary that it should b.
made universal, and that all Afric'
should be directly invited to come her
and vote. In order to put down the reb
ell element?
. Again, from the same column, W
End this:
"Not satisfied with declaring against negr
suffrage heFe--a measure which nobody eve
declared for--the Ensign now also opposes i'm
C partial suffrage a. the South and thinks 9Th
: negro votiag experiment ridiculous failure.
: Did the Oregonian declare for uni
versal negro suffrage then? We coul
: fill our columns with extracts from th
i Oregonidn showing that, both two an
four years ago, it emphatically denic
that the Union party favored universe
negro suffrage. OF course we hav
misrepresented the Oregonian but,
SO, it is because we have not exhibite
n -