Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1870-01-11
NEW YORK AND THE FIFTEENTH
AMENDMENT.

AM LIN " MIMI
On Wednesday, the 9Th inst, the Legisia-
ture of New York, by vote of sixteen to
twelve in the Senate, and sixty-nine to fifty
six in the House, passed the resolution to re-
scind her adoption of the fifteenth amend
meut. The discussion was brief, having been
curtaiied by call for the previous question.
The question how far such rescission is com.
petent to the State remains open as far as any
judicial adjudication thereof is concerned,
affecting the validity of the fourteenth
amendment, as it seems likely to affect that
of the fifteenth in the future. MIR. Seward,
it will be remembered, took care to leave the
question undecided in his proclamation pro-
muIying the fourteenth article. The execu>
tive and judicial branches of the govern
ment may be regarded as still silent, there's
fore. and the legislative alone as having spo-
ken on the subject. The language of the
Constitution is: THE Congress, whenever
tyo.thirds of both Houses shall deem it ne
cessary shall propose amendments to this Con-
stituton. or on the application of two>thirds
of the several States, shall call convention
proposing amendments, which, in either
case, shall be valid to all intents and pur-
poses. as part of this Constitution, when rat
fled by the Legislatures of three-fourths
OF the several States, or by conventions in
three -fourths thereof, as the one or the other
may be proposed by the Congress"
1t is clear from this language that where
the requisite number of States in the Union
have ratified any article properly proposed
as an amendment to the Constitution, it be-
came to all ntcnts and purposes part there>
of, without the necessity of any further ac-
ton either by the Congress or the Execu-
tive. But before such ratification it is equal
" clear that the amendment is not part of
the Constitution, and its RECESSION by any State
who may have acceded to it, is, therefore, no
violation of the Constitution. And as it is
not pretended that there are any federative
restrictions upon the Legislation of the States,
save those embraced in the Constitution, it is
plain that there is or can be no federal right
to prohibit State from resembling if she
thinks proper, nor in doing SO does she VIC
late any federal obligation. As far, there
fore, as her federal obligations are concerned
the State has locus penitenfIc, or period of
reconsideration, during the interval of her
own ratification, and that of the requisite
three~fou Of the States, in which she
zBa1y effectually rescind. AS far as her own
citizens are concerned, what is there to dis
tingush her ratification from any other act
of the Legislature, repealable at will by the
same authority that enacts? Nothing what
ever. Even if her act of accession contained
a clause prohibiting repeal, such clause
could not prevent RECESSION upon the uncon-
tested and universally recognized principle
that the prohibitory clause is itself repealed
by the subsequent repeating act.
For these reasons, therefore, for which we
challenge REPUTATION, VIC are confident that the
rescission by New York is perfectly fair,valid
and binding, both as to her own citizens, and
those of her co-States and the federal gov
eminent. And for the same reasons and 9TH
ers, we regard and have always regarded the
fourteenth amendment as unrati6ed, null and
void, and shall always believe until that
day-which God hasten forward.
- Treasurer Spinner is out in a letter de-
Tending the National banks from some hostile
criticism He scouts the idea that they are
l.. cooroJ M cove +Iar oro