Idaho semi-weekly world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1875-1908, 1890-02-28
EQUAL RIGHTS.


ana taxes his text from : quotation to
'ne ehect that native born American,
should be equally represented in
ONCE, on basis of numbers. Thi,
statement was liberal, we considered,
so liberal, in fact, tha. we did NOT
think solitary foreign born citizen
would object, unless it be those.
u there be such, who hold that this
government, and its offices, were
created expressly for foreigners. A
foreigner is foreigner, notwi.hstand.
ing ne is citizen, and . native born
is an American, no matter what the
nativity of his parents, grand parents.
nor where his ancestral lines NAV
branch to. In any case, where for
e'gners form any considerable per
cent. of population, they will kick if
'hsir numbers are not duly consid-
cred in the formation of the tickets
OF the two political parties, which is
perfectly natural, and natives gener.
ally will acknowledge the justice of
the kick. Conrad hints that il the
editor of the World is ever a candi.
date for Office he will see how he will
fail to get there against the foreigner
vote. What! Conrad, you surely
don't mean it? Your estimate of the
fairness of the foreign elements is
way below anything we ever con-
ceived or limited at. What, be de-
ftated on the ground that we are a
native American, and contend that
Americans should he equally repre-
sentsd in the distribution of Offices,
according to numbers. Surely none
but foreigners who hold to the doc.
trine that Americans in their own
country have no rights, would make
that ground for opposition. If this
were true (but happily we think it
isn't, Americans would be fully JUS
titled III disfranchising all foreigners.
Ii Conrad is correct, it would also H.
lustrate the unclannshness of the
Americans. For if we should be de.
feated, for tho reason that foreigners
would combine against us, it would
also be for the reason that Ameri-
cans would not flock to our support
for demanding for them equal
rights, and the reason for Anericans
flocking to the support of an American
in case of this kind would be even
more justiiable than the combining
of the forces of the different elements
Of naturalized citizens to form
the opposition, for, seeing that
foreigners were opposing on that
ground, it would be in the nature Of
a just retaliation and self protection
for Americans to uphold. We were
not speaking of law to rule in these
matters, but that the voters give the
Americans equal rights, which they
have failed to receive in this county
since its organization, as any one can
determine by examining for himself,
by looking at the list of successful
candidates. 1t is natural for all for
eigners to vote for their countrymen.
This is the rule, but there are excep.
ceptions. But when nationality is a
consideration with an American, it is
the exception, not the rule. In one
particular Conrad does not put the
case right. 1t is this: "This coun-
try was created and made what it is
to-day by foreigners" This us partly
correct. 1t was first settled by for
eigner., AS were all countries. The
present form of government was es-
tablished by the sword, principally
by natives, but this cannot be used
as a fact detrimental to foreigners,
for the reason that during the revolu-
tionary period their numbers were
small. Since the foundation OF this
government the country has been
made what it is principally by ma
t;ves, but the Foreigners, according to
their numbers, have contributed no.
bly and heroically to that end, along
side the natives. Well bet ten to
one that any foreigner who will con-
tend that his countrymen are enti'
tied to an equal share IN offices o1
emolument and honor, according to
numbers, would not lose solitary
Amer,can vote on the strength Of
that statement. But would an Amer
icau for SO coatending for natives:
There are some things in Mr.
Haao's letter We heartily agree with
Those unqualified, or unworthy FOL