National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-11-30

by majority, too, Of the white ''tax-pay-
ers' Of the District. But after the popular
sanction was thus given to it; after it was
passed by their representatives in the
Legislature, it came before another body,
not selected by the people, but appointed
by the President of the United States and
confirmed by the Senate. That body was
the Council, and it was an appointed and
not an elected body. 1t was composed Of
some of our best citizens, representing large
property interests and in every way worthy
to hold the seats they occupied. They
could have defeated the four million bill,
and would have done so if there had been
anything wrong about it, either in its con-
ception or in IFS passage. But if we recol-
lect Alright, they passed it without a dis
senting voice, whereas there were dis
agreeing votes and objections to its passage
in the lower house. The fact is the act
was popular one, and Endorsed by the
majority Of all our citizens who desired TO
see the city take a new departure; who
wished to pull it out of the mud and filth
in which it had lain for over seventy years
The truth is, the branch of the Government
which was created by suffrage under the
late Territorial form of management is the
least responsible for what has been done in
the city during the last three years, and if
any wrong has been done, which we deny,
the elective branch of all branches is not
the one upon whose shoulders the blame
should be thrown.
In this whole matter of suffrage in the Dis
trict, however, we simply contend for prin-
ciple. Government ofthe people for the peo-
pie and by the people is at the very founda-
iton of our institutions, and we cannot afford
to weaken it, or do anything to shake its sta
bility. 1t is the corner stone Of our whole
political fabric 1t is the essence of the
Declaration of Independence; the soul ofthe
Constitution. In the system that may be
devised for our government we have no
particular choice as TO who shall or shall
not be elected by the people, but we insist
that the right of electing somebody shall
not be entirely taken away. We demand
that right; first upon non-partisan grounds,
and second, rs a party measure. Nearing
the Centennial of American Independence,
when we shall celebrate the heroic action of
the men who made war because they were
taxed without the right of representation,
we do not intend to confess that what they
fought for is, after all, only a sham, u snare
and a delusiOn. As Americans we cannot
oil hot e. Io i. D.,
publicans we must not make it to the cOun-
try. The party that enlarged the suffrage
in this town, enlarged it before the Consti-
tuition was amended, must not now set the
example Of restricting it after the Constitu-
ton has been amended. 1t is a curious
fact that at the present time London, the
capital city of England, in endeavOring to
obtain new and better form of govern
ment, proposes to discard the very system
which a number of our citizens at the end,
or nearly at the end, of our centenary of
independence and political freedom propose
to adopt. For years and years she has
been governed by boards and vestries, all
of which have become so cumbrous, cor
IupL anu 4uCluSlCut ludG uO lCSS llldu IuICC
bills have been introduced in Parliament,
all with the avowed object of sweeping
them away and giving its citizens broader
and more generous inspiration and free
dom. There the proposition is to enlarge
the elective franchise. Here, on the con-
trary, the proposition is not alone to re-
strict it, but to abolish it altogether. Is
the Republican party prepared TO stultify
itself in this way at the end of fourteen
years of its power?