National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-12-09

Inc HreSlQenJ IN his message Calls dllcu-
ton to the fact that the constitution of
Arkansas has been changed in violation of
its own provisions, and states that inasmuch
as Congress is investigating the political
condition of Arkansas, he has thus far
declined to interfere, but says: with the
claw to support it, it is condemned without
ga hearing" Truer words were never
spoken, and the country never witnessed
such departures from law as preceded and
kept pace with the destruction Of a consti-
tutional form of government. The history
of no country can show its parallel, and
recital of the facts shock the moral SEN
sibilities of every man acquainted with
them. In the Rhode Island case it was
claimed the people had right, without the
assistance of an enabling act to create
another constitution, but in the Arkansas
case the claim is that body of men claim
ing to be members of the General Assembly
of State may assemble within the military
lines of faction and pass a law calling a
constitutional convention, when the consti-
tuition itself prohibits it and provides how
the same shall be altered or amended.
When we come to take into consideration
that twenty seven persons were admitted
to seats in the House of Representatives to
fill vacancies which did not exist, and that
ten were admitted to seats in the Senate to
fill vacancies that did not exist, and that
these twenty-seven persons in the House
and the ten in the Senate at all times
during the session Of the sO-Called eXtraOr-
binary session of the Legislature, cOnsti-
tuted a majority of each branch of the
General Assembly, and that these are the
persons that called the constitutional con-
vention in Arkansas, it is time for thinking
men TO reflect whether such a precedent
shall pass into history and furnish a rule
for other States to follow.
In looking over the pretended constitu-
ton, and We have given it but cursory
examination, we find that in amending the
constitution of 1868, the White Leaguers of
Arkansas have stricken out the following
provisions: First provision that inhibited
the Legislature from paying for emanci-
pated slaves; second, provision inhibiting
the Legislature from paying any debt or
liability incurred in aid of the rebellion;
third, a provision that asserted the para
mount allegiance of the citizen was due to
the United States; fourth, a proposition
that asserted that no power existed in the
people to dissolve their connection with
the Federal Government fifth, a pro-
vision that denied the right of seces-
sion; sixth, a provision asserting that
the Federal Government is clothed with
power TO maintain and perpetuate its
existence by force of arms; seventh, a
provision that pledged the faith and credit
of the State to the payment of its debt, and
eighth, provision that made every elector
competent to serve as juror. These acts
of themselves ought to condemn any con-
stitutiOD, no matter how regularly and law
fully the people had proceeded. These
were the vital questions of the war; yet
we find the White Leaguers of Arkansas
returning to their secession vOmit. In the
act admitting Arkansas to representations
Congress is a provision that, in the event
the constitution of that State should be
altered or amended, it should not be so al
tered or amended as to disfranchise voters
in regard to time and place of residence,
unless it was done prospectiUeIy. Yet in
the face of this provision, the White
Leaguers have declared constitution rati-
fed that DISTINGUISHES thousands of persons
who were electors under the constitution of
1868. This sort of work cannot be tOle-
rated, and we believe that Congress will
teach that element of society that the forms
of law and the questions settled by the
war must be observed.