The daily gazette., 1881-05-28
SECOND EDITION
Restrictions ON Suffrage.
From the Independent.


From the Independent. ...
During the long wrsngle In the Sem
ate, In which almost everything has
been talked about except the business
for which the Senate was called togsth-
or, several Republican Senators have
pointed to the practical denial at the
South OF \ free ballot and an honest
count In respect to col0red votes. Some
Of these speeches have presented strong
array OF facts showing the extent TO
which and the methods by which the
colOred vote has been virtually annihila-
ted In, at least some Of the Southern
States. This Ia particularly true of the
speech Of Senator Frye, having reference
TO the last election, and supported by.
facts and statistics largely gathered
from the Department of Justice. Ex A.
torney General Devens, in his last an
nual report, recommended Congress to
provide by law that alt electioas, sfor
members of the House of Representa-
tives should be under the direct and ex-
elusive supervision of Federal officers,
thus dispensing with State officers alto
gether. We have no doubt that the pic
ture, ss drawn by these Republican Sem
ators, is substantially true. Senator
Hampton admitted this in respect to
South Carolina.
The Southern Democratic Senators
have made two replies, one Of which
consists In denying the statement and
charging gross misreprt ssntation Of the
South. The other consists in pointing
to the election laws Of some Northern
States, particularly Massachusetts and
Rhode Island, in which large numbers
Of male adults are disfranchised. The
constitution Of Massachusetts excludes
oil persons from voting who cannot read
the constitution of that State IN the En-
glish language aud write their names
The consultation of Rhode Island ex-
cludes all persons who do not own real
estate to the value of $l34 over and
above all membranes on the same
In the Que State we fnd the intelligence
quail ficatiOn, and In the other the prop
erty qualification, and 10 both the exciu-
sion Of large number OF persons who
would otherwise be qualified TO vote.--
A man may pay taxes on 81, 10000 in
Massachusetts, yet, II he caunot read the
Constitution Of that State In the English
language and write his own name, be
has no right to vote. So one may have
any amount of intelligence IN Rhode Is
land, yet, unless he owns real estate TO
the value Of $134, he has no right to
vote. Not half of the male adults in
Rhode Island, being Of the proper age,
and having the proper residence, can
vote, and IN Massachusetts some thou
sands OF such adults are excluded from
voting. 49,. ..e-.s.
Now, when the Southern Democratic
Senators point to these facts by way of
retort and arQtlnlenttm nd h0minen1,
they do not, indeed, make their own
case any better. or Justify any wrongs
which lie at their door, and which they
ought to do their utmost to correct; but
| the do refer 20 an injustice and wrong
in at least these two States, which aiso
ought to be corrected. Massach usstts
and Rhode Island are exceptional to oil
the other States in their legal restrictions
upon the elective franchise; and II they
complain Of the white Democrats OF the
South because the elective franchise 10
there prac ically denied 10 colored peo-
Pile, even without law, as they justly
may, then those same Democrats may
and do say to them:-"Physician, heal
thysell." There Is force In the retort,
and there Is no adequate answer to 1t.
The plain truth 10 that the wrongs
against the elective franchise ut the
south ought to be admitted and correct
ed. There Is no use IN denying them,
since the evidence of the existence II
overwhelming, and they canno: be justi-
| fed. The constitatonal restrictions in
NJ Massachusetts and Rhode Island, to
which the Southern Senators have 70.
fsrred, ought also to be corrected. They
are unfair and unjust TO large number
Of persons otherwise qualified to vote.-
They are behind the age and contrary
can people in regard to the elective fran
chise. We protest against the wrongs
on this subject which exist At the Soutk,
and equally against the Constitution ex-
clusions In Massachusetts and Rhode
Island.