New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-03-25
DErOCRAUY UNVEILED.

CO06tIuCC1Ou VI CA0 IOau, una 30 mby VI
may not ourselves vote for the tax. We
have, however, assn med the republican
principle that all men not disqualified by
law are political equa Is, and thus entitled
to vote on the great questions of peace,
war or taxation. We will state the re-
publican principle distinctly. The power
of eminent domain under which State
may conscript all its men to war, or con-
denim all its property to the public safety
subject, of course, to the limitations which
the people have placed on their representa-
tives-lies in al the equal voters Of the
State.
We draw this principle from the history
Of liberty. If any wish q special au-
thority it is given by Thomas Jefferson,
whom Democracy pretend to be their pa
tron saint, whose name is ever in the De-
mocratic mouth, while their hearts are very
for from his precepts. He states as 20
capital defect" of the government Of the
State that the majority of the men in his
State, who pay and fight for its support
are unrepresented in the Legislature, the
roll of freeholders (holders Of real estate)
entitled to vote not including generally
the half of those on the roll of the military
or of the tax gather"
Such was the doctrine afterward ex-
pressed in the phrase that "all men are
created equal" and the basis of that equal
ity now embodied in the constitution Of
the United States and of every State in
the Union.
The Southern Democracy, however, op-
pose this principle of equal suffrage. 1t
is for this reason they oppose the suffrage
of the colored man. In the mind of the
Southern Democracy no poor man should
be permitted to vote. The opposition to
the right Of suffrage is not limited by the
color, but the Southern Democrat denies
On principle the right of the poor man to
vote, ,ohether ,chite or black. The principle
laid down by the Southern Democrat
would even give the right to q oolored
man holding property, while they would
deny the right to the manned Confederate
soldier who has no property.
We will now offer proof Of what we
have alleged. The Democrat, which is
regarded as the representative Of States
rights Democracy, discusses the propriety
of subscription by taxation to the stock
to the New Orleans Pacific railroad. 1t
does entire justice to the importance and
and commercial necessity OF the work,
and urges its construction by the contri-
button of all interests according to their
ability. 1t bases its opposition to the
vote purely and exclusively upon the fact
that people who have no property will
thereby be enabled to impose tax upon
the property of others. We will state its
position in its own language:
We are of the opinion, however, that
there are greater-infnitely graater-pub-
lie interests than those subserved by rail
road enterprises, and we can not cOnscien-
tiously give our support to a measure
which, though designed to aid an import
ant railroad, riotates those ,c.se guarantees
pAich all constitutional government yireS the
minority against the cncreachments Of the
majority ln sill enlightened countries the
rights of property are as securely guarded
as those of life; and 20 burdens should
be imposed upon property, save what are
necessary to carry on an honest and eco
nOmical government.
1t reiterates this doctrine:
And the principle is every thing. The
principle at the bottom of them ALL is the
right of The majority to cote a,c0y the prop
erty Of The minority; to trample down the
constitutional barriers which have been
erected to protect the minority against the
rapacity of the majority, and we all know
where that ultimately leads.
The Democrat then argues the ruinous |
consequences Of the dangerous doctrine.
But when we admit the competency Of a |
majority Of the community to vote tax
upon the unwilling minority to aid an en-
terprise we may favor, what barrier can we !
set up against the will Of majority when,
led by unprincipled men in power, it pro- |
ceeds to vote away the property of the |
minority for the schemes of robbers and |
swindle1s who may be in authority! There |
constitution which authorizes any of us to |
arbitrarily determine what Is an honest,
and what a dishonest enterprise; and when |
we admit the right of the majority to vote |
the property of the minority to aid in build |
ing the New Orleans Pacific railroad, we |
admit the right of the majority to vote the 1
of the minority to aid any scheme
which may please the majority, or which
bad men may succeed IN making the ma.
jority believe is right. In short, we destroy
one Of the fundamental principles of gov
ernment and society. and launch ourselves
upon those terrible seas Of Agrarianism
and Communism in which every public
and private interest may be wrecked.
We have seen the principle advanced
hat a municipal or other corporation
possessed sovereign rights which were
Of Legislative control. We
nave seen it argued that the protection of
louses from undue taxation was of more
than the reduction of taxes
N industry, but we have not seen such
doctrines advanced as is comprehended
n the extracts quoted. Why should not
il voters be intrusted with the right to
egislate on all property? Are houses
more sacred than men in the Democratic
mind? "a man," said DR.. Franklin,
discussing the same old, old question,
owns jackass and votes upon his
property. He sells his jackass and loses
he vote, which passes with the jackass.
n which does the right Of suffrage reside?
n the man or the jackass?" |,
The theory of this republic is based