The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1870-11-29

void, by renewing the old argument OF
It's retrospective" and ss,pOSt JactO effect.
The Register yesterday labored through a
column in celebrating this idea. 1t re.
lied chiefly on the language Of Section l,
Art XII, Of tie State Constitution, which
section relates solely to amending the
Constitution by Convention, that Ian
guage being that "all acts and ordinances
of the Convention shall be submitted to
the voters for ratification or rejection,
"and shall have no validity whatever until
they are ratified and in no event shall
they, by any shift or device, be made to
have any retrospective operation or
effect" The Regi1er claims that the
amendment OF 1866 was retrospective in
its operation and effect, therefore for.
hidden by tho language quoted, and there
fore void; I; furthermore that it Is ss post
Jac0, forbidden by the Constitution oil the
United States, and for this reason, also,
void. This Is the gist Of tho article.
In the first place the language quoted
shows, and an examination Of the whole
section will show more plainly, that the
language quoted in regard to the retro
spective shit or device refers exclusively
to the "acts and ordinances" say amend.
ments proposed-by convention, and
not to amendments made, as the amend
ment Of 1866 was under the section follow
lowing that quoted from, IF this were
not true, it would still be an absurdity to
say, as the Register does, that the Amend
ment of 1860 is void because express
ly forbidden" by the. Constitution. 1t
says: 1.-THE adoption of such q measure is
expressly forbidden by the Constitution
itself" Let US analyze this. The object
in amending the Constitution Is to change
It in the particulars wherein the amend
ment differs from or conflicts with It. The
power that makes q constitution is a
power that can alter It at pleasure, 1t is
therefore simply absurd to assume
that such an instrument csnbe made to
to tic up It's makers and forbid
their unmaking or altering it Their
later act necessarily overrides and takes
the place of their former act at every point
where the two conflict. This d. exactly
what amendments are for. II it were
true that the amendment Of 1885 C0nflic-
ted with the language we have quoted
forbidding any retrospective shit or de-
vice, of course the latter gives way and
the former is the law. But that language
has no application to the amendment Of
1865. II refers exclusively as we have
said, to the acts and ordinances of con-
vention, and relates to the time when they
shall begin their operation, not at all to
what that operation may be after 1t does
begin. For example in the case of sut-
frage amendment whereby persons are to
be enfranchised, 1t would mean that the
acknowledgements shall not take place till
the amendment hos been duly ratified and
proclaimed; that is, that the amendment
should not make men voters before It was
part Of the constitution. This would be
Just such Il retrospective shit or device
as is here described. Therefore, we say
the amendment Of 1866 in no wise conflicts
with 1t, though If It did the amendment
would override It. 5an1 4a,1.r
The case would be different, and the
Amendment would be nulllty, If it were
true, as claimed, that itcolaicts with the
Constitution Of the United States in being
a post tacto. Es post tae0 laws, as always
understood in this country and defined by
the courts, relate only to crimes and pun
iahmenls. Such a law is one that raises
the grade Of an offence, or increases the
punishment after the offence Is committed
Iflthe disftanchisement OF those who
rebelled against the government were a
punishment for that act, 1t would mot be
a post tacto, except that literally it would
be after the fact. It would not violate the
intention o! the prohibition, for 1t does
not make tho crime greater than treason
or inflict severer penalty than death, i
anything, It, lowers the grade Of the
offence and dEminishcs the punishment
But the fundamental error committed by
the Register Is In assuming that the denial
OF suftageis Is punitive; that the persons
DISTINGUISHED BY the Amendment Of 1886
were 50 disfranchised in puniShmentof Of
fences committed by them. The simple
truth Is that regulations Of suffrage are moi
forpunishmeut Of the past but'fof the pro
lection and welfare Of tho body polite ii
the future. Ithappened in this csse that
certain class Of persons, by their polltica
inidellty to society, had given ground fol
the belief that the satety Of the body poll
tic demanded that the privilege Of the bal
lot should for q timebe withheld tromthem
The rule being that all vote, tits necessary
particularly to designate the excepted
classes. The only way TO designate
this class was to refer to them as having
committed certain actS; but the depriva
ton they suffered was not designed to be
In punishment ofithose acts. The power
to regulate suffrage Is absolute in thG
State. Suffrage Is granted and denied
without the assignment Of reasons, The
only thing done, ever and anywhere, is ID