The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-06-23

protest, WITHOUT organized ana ueJermlnod
resistance, to any and every such intolerabe
Interpretation of the Constitution as it is.
1t was not alone Democratic Senators who
said in opposing the Ku-klux bill-it was
Senator Trumbull who said 1.-THE question
before us is really a question whether we
will revolutionize our Government" This
proposed revolution none but Grant radicals
accept Not one Republican of Democratic
anteoedents can accept it. All Democrats at
the North, and no Democrats more earnestly
than the Democrats at the South, loathe and
set their heels upon this plan for converting
our Federal republic into solid empire.
More keenly than the North does the South
feel that under such an imperial State local
liberties would be lost; more keenly does the
North feel than the South that the lasting
unity of such a monstrous infexible State
would be impossible.
In discRrding the three amendments from
the issues of 1872, the Democratic party sur
renders not one syllable of any of its past
authentic utterance of the rights of States
Northern Democrats deny, as they have
always denied, that secession is such right;
and Southern Democrats accept the situation
that war has ended debate. But every other
State right defined or reserved in the Federal
Constitution, asserted in Democratic plat
forms, affirmed by the Supreme Court of these
States United-to these and all of them they
melt them indistinguishably in Grants impe-
rial brazier. Thus the Democratic party could
not and would not discard from the issues
of 1872 the three amendments if they iust-
fed those usurpations which Grant and his
party have cut the ties and laid rails for in
the Ku-klux act-usurpation of the State
rights of police, usurpation of the State right
to have the suspension of the habeas corpus
writ kept within the legislative discretion and
InAA1 1nla tod b. s1.N- II.
to the Presidency. Usurpation of the State
right to make and administer all criminal ard
property laws would be as we'll justified for
the gate is left wide open-if the XIVth
amendment could Justify the actual usurpa-
tions of the Ku-klux act. But it justiies
neither these nor those-not one of them.
We are aware that the Ku-klux act is en-
titled "An act to enforce the provisions of the
fourteenth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States and for other purposes"
but not whit the more has the act that or
any other legal foundation. We are aware
also what can be affirmed concerning the
dubietY that should continue till the Supreme
Court pronounce whether or no the Ku-klux
act is thus we'll based, as in this passage from
the Boston Ad0ertiser:-
'To put its issue in its own words, THE yeast In
the dough Is what this journal has said about the
ku,kluX law and the purpose OF Grant Republicans
to blot out the States, to leave practically
one government with ITS political centre in Wash
ington.' Now AS the Ku klux law was passed under
authority OF new provisions of the Constitution, by
which the 81 ates have expressly delegated to Con-
gress powers to legslate for the protection
tain personal rights aud the prohibition OF certain
State interferences, which constitutional provisions
have never yet been in any way before the Supreme
Court, we do not see how the question is to be de-
termined by decisions made before the Con-
stitution was amended. If the World is
honest In It's professions OF acquiescence ia the
Constitution as it is, it IL impertnent for 1t to be
now bringing laws passed in pursuance of the new
TnrGf ffnf ftnn fn Tho fnat ndar
the old Whether by this process fairly applied
it would succeed in making its point is immaterla.
Supposing IL Should 1t would be OF no more practi-
cal consequence than if it should succeed as it un-
doubtedy could, in showing that the Ku-kux law
does not conform to the Articles OF Confederation
adopted before there was any Constitution. The
Worlds notion OF applying the decisions of the Su
purpose OF Grant Republicans TO blot the States
so as to leave but one government would be one Of
the most impudent OF presumptons If it were not
the most grotesque and farcica." DBL. .s
The history of the fourteenth amendment
is conclusive, without reverting to the test of
judicial decisions, which either prove our
thesis, or else prove that the fourteenth ex-
plunged prOpri0 0ig0re the whole Constitution
and all thirteen of its previous amendments
MIR. Bingham reported the first draft of the
amendment. To it was objected that it did
authorize Congress to do what radical Con-
| gress (seeing no other hope of escape from
losing power in '72) has attempted in the
Ku-klux act. Republicans not wearing Grant s
collar now, united with Democrats in de-
nouncing Mr.. Binghams proposal 1t was
never brought to vote in either house. At
terwards Mr.. Thaddeus Stevens introduced
all of the first section of amendment four
teenth as it now stands, except the first sen.
tence and excluding therefrom the de-
nounced clauses of the original Bingham pro.
posal.
That Congress now, in furtherance of 6
political scheme, has given construction tc
Amendment XIV which obliterates this differ
ence is no proof that Amendment XIV war
rants the Ku-klux act as the Bingham propo
sal might have warranted it, but is proof tha
the imperialists feared defeat even before
Congress, then; and that when closer to tn,
peril they dragooned their more scrupuloui
associates thus to attempt to avert next year.
defeat. ..I.....- ..s I..
But decisions made before the Constitu-
ton was amended" a fourteenth time dc
enable every lawyer, every publicist, ever!
reasoning man of trained or unframed facul
ties, to see that the Ku-klux act is downright
usurpation, infamous in itself for the uses t,
which Grant may put it in the interest of hi
own dictatorship, but much more portentou
for the revolution which it inaugurates in tn,
interest of the imperialists and consolidation
lists among us, of whom Grant is but th
present fle-leader. The first part of Amend
ment XIV confers United States and Stat
citizenship according to birth, naturalization
and residence here. Then follow three classe
of prohibitions addressed to State. Citizen
shall not by State have their immunities an,
privileges of United States citizenship
abridged by the making or enforcing of an
law; persons shall not by State be deprive
OF life, liberty, or property without due pro
cess of law; persons shall not by State b
denied the equal protection of the laws.