The daily gazette., 1877-10-25
OCTOBER %. 1877.
A Dtsframchisi,sg Amendment

n Disfr0nchisissg Amendment.
A large meeting was held in New York
on Monday evening for the purpose OF
urging an amendment to the city charter
to disfranchise a large body of citizens.
We have no doubt that the introduction
of the negroes to the polls has been pro-
ductive of this attempt to abridge the
right which few years ago the chief act
ors In the meeting in New York declar-
ed was natural and inestimable. Surely
the enfranchisment ofthe negro element
has done much to disgust the people with
universal suffrage and it may fairly be
inferred that it was resorted to by many
of the leaders of the Radical party with
a view to curtailing this right to the
white people at some future favorable
time. The alarming effects of universal
suffrage at the South in the increase of
debt and destruction to utilitarian efforts
has shown so clearly how much to be
dreaded ignorant and vicious suffrageans
are. We shall never agree that the poor
white people shall be deprived of the
right of suffrage in Delaware /; and we
are gratified to find the New York Her.
aid, so far opposed to contracting this
protecting power of the poor people as to
discuss this question fairly and present
many good reasons why the proposed dis
franchising amendment should not be
urged. If there is any class of people
who dread universal suffrage one might
think it was those who hold U. S. bonds
and were clamoring SO loudly for their
payment in nothing but gold. We make
the following extract from long editor
ial in yesterdays Herald:
The property qualification alone would
operate as a wholesale Acknowledgement
1t might as well have put at $1,000 as at
$500. Indeed, most or our citizens who
pay taxes at all do so on a much higher
few lots in this city with buildings on
them which are worth less than $4,000,
and very few people pay tax on person
al property unless they also own real es-
tate. People who pay city tax on so
low a value as$5, ,009 hardly appear on the
collectors books. Setting the limit at
$500 is therefore deceptive, as tending
10 conceal the extent of the disfranchise-
ment. Those whose property does not
rise pretty well up into the thousands do
not pay taxes in this city in sufficient
numbers to make any show in an cleo
tion.
1t is sought to extend the proposed
suffrage beyond so narrow a limit BY ad-
mitting persons who have paid an annual
rent of $3.50 for two years. This indeed
extends the basis very considerably, but
still, like the other, it is far from being
as liberal as it looks. 1t would exclude Il
much greater number of honest than of
disreputable citizens. Mr.. Simon Sterne,
in his able speech at the recent meeting,
gave the following description of the
classes he wishes to exclude:-"All that
we have insisted upon and do now insist
upon is that some barrier shall be per-
manently fixed which shall prevent the
inc0rrigible hummer and the homeless
pauper from being an intregal part of the
financial administration OF our great and
growing cities. We leave even to this
hummer aud this pauper all their civic
rights and more."--Let us test the cor
rectness of this description, by finding
who these "bummers" and 'fpaupers''
are whose night to vote on muniCi iDf
questions is denied.
The amendment excludes the unmarried
sons of our respectable and Virtuous fami-
lies, most of whom pay neither taxes nor
rent, and of the few who DO il fixes the yo-
ting age at twenty-three instead of twenty
one, since the taxes or rent must have been
paid for two years. IL excludes with euual
rigor all students of law, divinity or medi-
cine whose expenses are paid by their fam
lilies; all young professional men who have
not yet made their way to a remuneratiye
practice; majority of the clerks in our
mercantile, banking and insurance estab-
ltshments; all the conductors and drivers
on our street railroads all our common
day laborers and a majority OF our indus
trious mechanics. Either Mr.. Sterne does
not see the scope of the amendment, or in
the heat of advocacy he loses his sense of
justice when he declares that all he insists
upon is the exclusion of "the incorripi hle
hummer" and 'the hopeless pauperv from
a voice in municipal affairs. The amend
ment would disfranchise large share of
the most deserving men in the communi-
", but IT would distranchise no keeper OF
= grogshop, no Keeper OF gambling hell.
mo proprietor of a bawdy house0all OF
HON pay at least $3.50 annual rent, il
Fy do not pay taxes. There is in this city
ny q senterl gambler, many a well
ed Dlackleg, who would be entitled 10
lder this amendment, which would
lie the greater portion of young law
II physicians, clergymen and most un-
/.rrleu sons of good families between the
/ses OF twsnty.one and twenty-seyen. II
viii not quite DO to stigmatize citizens OF
.nls respectable type as incorrigible bum.
mers or hopeless pauperS, Mr. Sterne by
this lntemperance of statement. yirtually
aunllts, without perceiving it, that q true
description of the disfranchlsed classes
Would turn the public mind against tht
amendment.