The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1871-07-14

,,o Now departure in Georgia
The strength of the new dcpa't" w., forced
~ Great even in Georgia. since IL , VA IN the
AR STEPHENS to define his poS''''
following manner ,
tr-o,o the Atlanta s""''
or THE MYTH AM
AMENDMENTS ca.,,
,,,rtecnth and fifteenth
Whcther I've nc valid parts OF the oohs.,.u-
amendments not the question WehoW Pio-
ton or noi. That they were cafrlca -!
pose 10 o's[ 6iv. and violence, all aunt
.'Irnu"' Tneihcr validity can, in tins way.
Now ,,,ortcd to any private, Judlclal, vi
ne .;',atiyc act, might very wei sccil ~ ~
"SI,ncrfluous question. But VIVA. VIC u '.ho
f. ,:tv At this time Is. that no pr' 1r,oJ,ntn-
,rc iruc to their rights will ever, Vo.n' .t'n
..,iy Give their sanction, in ddUGnce, 10 wy
ran3,fu Of such outrages upon the iisn.' -, r.,
80 ,,.nnIa and of the States as .Ii ' ord
WI" these amendments are Openly al"
ayowedly committed. .ot hoen held 10 be
H,vc they. then, ever yet oecn INV If tho
rol,S or proclaimed To be cdad, p'l onst,m.
organic law by any "a; au.n i., 'o,,In,h,tic,llv
tionally appointed
Ing. liic. ni has no authority whatever
=, dncl,rc hy proclamation what arc a."
, ~ arc not valid parts of the oo iini,ed
ia. fhe Su,scmc Court OF Tue ~. ~,
s s,"tc over vet decided upon their validity
II has not ,a tho Democracy,
North or South, be asKee az. a. ' n,ostion. to
.Jwonoe IF the decision OF the queS.,un' ~
aUsorr their belief that these amenullsna7
are ra,id and have been passed or ihcoi p ~
r,tor i'm fhe fundamental! law " az ''e "'oue
faa I hi tbe manner conststuionally appoint
90" # is against this .hatwe enter our ealh'S'
protest. ,r,, tho loader on this
line Of policy, i'll late arllcis, 49, nf these
Inc qaest o'nl b,s not vet been decided 0!
,hn nnerv.constitutcd AUTHORITY: - n"'
,,,,r IN the same article, goes lu''noi,
na ,a,s that in its opinion, they ouShO
,'n az, 80 10 held invalid" when they sh'''l oe
properly acted upon. ,..o doc;sion Of
WV then. in advance OF the decision u, y,
.,o GHes,ion. should the Democracy ne
committed to the mon>trollS dcclrilic we,
"fraud. pcrtidy. uiolcnce, ana oI;.M 1 ~ sI,rh
hon'' can give permanent Taiu,ts ~, Smrh
revolution in the Federal coua' S ,"d rs
Ianriv,,iou of the rights Of the states a.
these so.rallcd amendments were ail'i,a ~
effect? j. it sound policy or WIS., - S'',:'~
Inanship: -,
,v,o, ,,o rcmcmber how able man Mr..
STEPHENS j., We cannot pu' DC st' uon w..
,rc weakness of the above article. nat =
,h.rc iii; Positively nothing except inc
declaration that the South ought 10 wat
nptn the Supreme Court OF the 'ni'eo
States has passed upon the validity o' 'ho
new amendments before accepting II is Il
fact. Mr.. STEpHENs's indignant dcnial vi
the right of the President TO declare D.!
proclamation Whist are and WHAT are ho'
valid pIrts of the Constitution, ana his 81
Icucc a to the action Of CongreSs-tllc iieI
being thai both Congress and the ircsl''ch'
have officially proclaimed the validity OF 'He
new umcndmcnts--are equally suggestive I.
His denial Of the power to the PRESIDENT
ard his omission to say aught Is to whether
CONGRESS has transcribed its authority,
both point to the fact that The. new aincna-
meu,s lack nothin. but the endorsement OF
the Supreme Court to render them valid
even in Mr.. STEPHESs's opinion.
What, then, is Mr.. STEPHESs's quarre!
with the advocates of the new departure:
We caunot imagine. II the Supreme Court
tlcrll!pS lIal the NEW Az III
valid, not even the Radicals viii fail to re-
sprc, the decision, much less the Demo-
Gratis. There is no difference between AIR.
STEPHENS and us on this point, except that
We are willing TO own that 50 far as the ac-
ton of Congress and the President can ren-
der them so, the new amendments are
valid whilst he asks that they shall not be
recognized as valid until the Supreme Court
shall have decided them SO to be. /" why,
he asks, " should the Democracy, North or
:. South, he asked at this time, in advance
- of the decision Of the question, TO assert
:. that these amendments are valid: why
not ? we ask. The Legislative and the In
cru,iye Departments Of the Government
have decided them to he 50. Why should
we not accept them as such until the Sill
ureme Court rcrerSeS their decision:
At present, the weight Of authority is in
favor of their validity. Two OF the three
DEPARTMENTS OF the Government have de-
cidcd that they are valid. The kukluX act
we bcleyc-wc might say that we know
to be unconstitutional. But we submit 10
that act and it is tie duty OF every officer
:apd it follows of every citiZcn) 10 treat
eveu that act as constitutional until the
courts decide it be not so. We say the
same as to the amendments. They were
neither proposed nor ratified i'll the man-
ncr prescribed IN the Constitution. Never
thelesS, the executive aud the legislative
dera,tmcnts Of the Government both have
taken II different view from ours, and have
declared in solemn form that they are parts
of the Constitution. Shall we, then, VINO
have no right to decide except for ourselves,
set up our opinion rs infallible. and treat
that of the two departments OF the TO-
yernmcnt which must officially act on these
amendments as not worthy even OF respect
But let Mr.. STEPHENS answer these ques-
tons AS he may, he has virtually admitted
that when the Supreme Court shall have
decided the amendments to be valid, he
will respect them as being so. The friends
of the new departure occupy the same
position substantially. They will no longer
claim that the amendments are valid when
The Supreme Court shall have decided that
they are not. In other words, both those
who favor the new departure and those
who agree with Mr.. STEPHENS are ready
and willing 10 accept the decision OF the
Supreme Court as final. Where, then, is
the important difference! There is none
worthy Of consideration. Why, then,