Ashtabula weekly telegraph. (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1880-1886, 1880-09-24
What Packed Supreme Court May
nO

pc followed Dy SuCn TeCOnSlIuCIlOu OF
the Supreme Court as will enable the
Democrats to have the Constitutional
declared invalid and the
way prepared for payment of the rebels
!Or their slaves and for disfranchise-
meut Of the negroes. But it is worth
while to ask, Is such q scheme intrin- |
Iically improbableP Is there anything |
in the history of the South, or in its
present attitude, which may serve as an |
assurance that such an enterprise is at |
least unlikely In such a matter, in |
volving the loss of much that we gained |
Rt a terrible cost in the war, we ought |
to give weight to facts and figures, and |
not to accept the bare statements of |
irresponsible persons. The very same
persons twenty years ago ridiculed the
idea that the Southerners would assail
:he Government by force of arms.
The unlikely thing is sometimes the
hing to look for. Nothing, for exam
pie, seemed more unlikely fifteen years
lgo than that rebel brigadiers would
now have control of the legislation of
lhe country.
One of the first facts we encounter
N examining the subject in question is
hat the Democratic party, and partic-
Llarly the Southern wing of it, has
never given willing assent to the Con-
stitutiOnal amendments. They were
not approved by single Democratic
Legislature, and Democratic Legisla-
lures in some cases repudiated the fa-
vorable action of their Republican pre-
decessors upon them. Virginia, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, AL
ALBANIA, Texas and Arkansas
voted against the adoption of
the Fourteenth Amendment, in each
case almost unanimously; and the feel
ing which actuated them found ex-
preston in the North Multitudes of
Northern Democrats hold that the
| amendments were not fairly carried.
Our own Mr.. Richard Vaux, for ex-
ample, in a manifesto issued by him
and other Pennsylvania Democrats in
| 1871, declared that the amendments
"were carried by brute force and by
frauds upon the public will so glaring
as to take from their authors all claims
upon our respect; and further, that at.
| is farce to maintain that the ratifica-
ton of these so-called radical amend
ments by States, held as they were by
force, could, under the force of military
rule, be the act of free and sovereign
Commonwealth, enabling it to ratify
amendments to the Constitution which
sovereign, free and independent States
only have the power to do" We ask
especial attention to this expresson of
opinion. 1t is that of q Northern DEM
ocratic lawyer, and without doubt it
represents the ground upon which the
validity of the amendments will be at
tackled in the event of a Democratic
victory. Precisely the same opinion is
held by thousands of other Democrats,
North and South and it is of course
inevitable that man who sincerely be-
leves that the amendments were not
fairly carried should have no scruples
in proposing to overthrow them. Upon
this point the Southern people are prac-
tically unit. Already they have actu-
ally demonstrated what is their opinion
of the amendments by multiplying then
as matter of fact, so far as they could
do so, by employing force and fraud tc
disfranchise negro citizens.
That reorganization of the Supreme
Court in the interests of the Democratic
party is not improbable, is proved salts
luGLOllll w blD NllCullloNalANO Alltlb wi
Morgan, of Alabama, introduced intC
Congress in the last session q bill for in
creasing the number of Judges of thu
Supreme Court to twenty-one. If tn,
Democrats shall succeed in November
what reason is there for supposing tina
this bill will not be passed. And if i
l shall be passed is it not nearly certain
that Democratic President will pacl
the Supreme Bench with Democratic
lawyers who will do the bidding o
their party and do it willingly, as Mr.
; Vaux would, if he should happen to b
! one of the chosen onesP When we per
ceive how far the scheme already
upon the way to perfection, it is mere
' ly senseless to declare that such
scheme was never dreamed of. TIL
evidence that the South has always in
tended to demand payment for it
: slaves is positive. In the first place tn
= former owners of slaves have filed thei
y claims in the form of afiidayit5 in ever
State in the South. The Constitutio
. of Maryland, for example, declares thg
: the State shall not give compensatio
: for emancipated slaves, but it add
: "The Assembly shall adopt such mea
: ures as they shall deem expedient I
Z obtain from the United States comper
!, sation for such slaves and to receiy
= and distribute the same equitabl
u to the persons entitled Th
J Constitution was adopted Gtt,
% the ratification of the amendmel
which forbids such compensation. III
Georgia Convention, called by And
johnson in 1865, declared: "Acquie
cence in the action of the Governmel
10 of the United States is not intended
" operate as REIMBURSEMENT or waiv,
d or estoppel of such claim forcompens
IN tiOn Of loss sustained by reason OF Il
,s emancipation of his slaves as any cit
3. zen Of Georgia may hereafter make
In other States similar action has bet
~ taken, and the universal theory in Il
N South is that the Federal Government
- having taken away the slave propert
= ought of a right to pay for it. Certai
T. ly here are sufficient grounds for Il
," belief that as soon rs a packed Supren
Court shall declare the amendmen
e null and void, the former slave-owne
IN will be ready to push their claims. Al
sT there are other rebel claims which net
III not wait for the action of the COui
W Already there are upon file in COngre
'r Southern claims for compensation +
es property destroyed, bills for refundh
10 the cotton tax and for similar object
lu which amount in the aggregate to a d
is mand for $2,503, ,622, 3S6.
" From these facts, which are unil
peachable and beyond the reach of 8
IN gument, it will appear that the foa
40 entertained by Republicans Of revol
al ! tionarv measures in the event of [