Wyandot County Republican. [volume] (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1869-1903, 1872-02-08
f. D. Mansfield in a communica-


f. D. Mansfield in a communica-
ton to the Cincinnati Gazette, says:
But let us look to the zone term
principle" as it is called, and see how
little it consorts with the fundament-
al idea of American politics, or with
any hope of reform The discussion
is not, know, necessary to the par
ticular amendment; for if the authors
of it had desired its defeat they could
not bave chosen q time when defeat
was so certain. Mr.. Sumner, l have
no doubt, conscientiousiy thinks it
good thing; but why introduce it just
at this time? Why not two years
ago?
Mr.. Sumner makes some eXtraor-
dipary statemcnts-so extraordinary
that am startled. Here is one:
Does not experience confirm the
conclusion at which / have arrived !?
Is it not sustained by the best au-
thorities of this republic9 Who in
our history has arrayed himself on
the side which TIE Senator from New
York represents to-day? What en-
inent statesman has placed his name
on this question against the names OF
Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, and
BENJAMIN T. Wade? Who is the
statesman l know him not. Do
you sir? The Senator from New York
opposes these.
Why 1 should say that George
Washington, Thomas Jefferson,
James Madison, and Andrew Jack
son, himself had all directly and pos
itivcly opposed that principle. How
can man oppose anything more
than by his direct and emphatic con-
duct against it? George Washington
was o member of the convention
which formed the constitution, and
no man in the country was more IA
miliar with the opinions of the people
of the several States which adopted
the Constitution. What was his
practice and his opinion? His opin-
ion was that President might not
only be elected twice (Which he was },
but that he might be elected three
times, or any number of times. Mr..
Sumner might have learned this from
the first sentence of the farewell ad-
dress, which is this:
The period for selecting candidates
having arrived, Washington says :
cit appears to me proper, especially
as it may conduce to more distinct
expression of the public voice, that 1
should now apprise Of the resolution
l have formed to decline being con-
sidered among tile nans5er of those
out of achom choice as TO be made"
Washington had then been elected
twice, and he sees no impropriety in
being elected a third time; and, but
for his positive declination would
have been. The practices of sue
ceeding Presidents conformed to that
of Washington. What does Mr.
Sumner mean by asking where are the
STATESMAN opposed to his measure ?"
/ ask, where were there any in its IA
vor, till modern demagouges arose to
excite the people with imaginary
evils? We are to turn, then, from
the practice and opinions of Wash
ington. Jefferson, and Madison, TO
those Of Henry Clay, Ben. Wade, and
Charles Sumner. But, as I remarked
before, l care very little for authori-
ties, and certainly shall not be
alarmed by the last. Let us look
then to their reasoning. Mr.. Sum-
ner is perfectly aware that limiting
the power of the people is not likely
to be popular measure, if once un-
derstood. So he turns his attention
to it. He says:
Nay, il l understand him, he goes
further, and says that the people
onght not to be restrained in the
choice Of their Chief Magistrate. He
argues against restrictions upon the
people. Sir, that argument is an as
sault on constitutional law, that liber-
ty is maintained. What is the great
object of civilized government but
liberty regulated by law, liberty un-
der the safeguards of the Constitu-
ton?
This is another assertion so very
extraordinary that it fairly startles
me. Mr.. Sumner says, and l ask nv
readers to read and think of it: ut
as by restriction, upon the people,
assured By constitutional lay, that Id
erty is maintained" Now, what will
my reader think when l tell him that
the Constitution of the United States,
from the first letter 10 the last, con-
tains no restriction on the people
If, then, restrictions upon the people
by constitutional law be necessary to
maintain the liberties of the people,
the Constitution of the United States
has most signally failed, The Con
stitution was made and adopted by
the States, and its object was to pro.
vide the mode of election, the divi-
sion ofpowers, and the extent of pow
ers to be exercised by the agent of
the people. That was done, and bet
ter than it was ever done in the his
tory of the world. The first object
was to keep entirely seperate (Which
WAS the real thing necessary to lib
erty )the three functions of govern
ment-executive, Legislative and ju-
dicial. This was done most effective
ly. There were defined the respec-
tive provinces and duties of each of
these departments. Then, since the
States gave up portion Of their
powers for the sake of forming ma
tional government, there arc certain
restrictions placed upon the State
governments. But, mark! there are
aorestr;ctionsp placed upon the people.
The President could be re elected
any number of times, if the people
choose. The Senator can be re elect
ed any number of times eas they have
been), if the people of their respect
i've States choose, and the Repre-
sentatives may be elected indefinitely.
By what imaginable process has Mr..
Sumner arrived AT the conclusion that
to 81 -, tC