The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-08-11

The Republican press of the country is in
sore straits, cropping here and there for a
weak spot in the Democratic position as
clearly outlined and forcibly expressed in
Mr.. Bryan's speech of acceptance. The
principal answer SO far attempted has b=en
a comparison of the Acknowledgement of the
iiliterate colored vote in the South with
the establishment in our newly acquired
possessions of government by an alien rsc5
and against the will of the inhabitants.
For instance. one OF the ablest Of these
Republican opponents, the New York
SUM- as its best substitute for a reply. be-
gins:
"Bryan's -windcd. and dreary essay on i'm
perialism is reduced TO absIrdity by the proceed
ings q HE followers in DISTINGUISHING negro citi
zens Of the southern States. Even ii that policy
Of the Democratic party Is justified on the ground
q expectancy, Of the necessity Of white supre-
macy, the less. Of course, does ii fy in the
face Of the consent Of the governed principle OF
the Declaration Of Independence, TO which Bryan
expresses tender devotion"
This reductio ad absurdum answer was
joyfully echoed the next day with a few
changes rung in by the New York Times"
the Tribune, and other journals which
were too much dazed in the fist instance 10
think of il. Bryan, they said. could have
no sense Of humor in standing up in the
presence of Tillman of South Carolina and
Money OF Mississippi and contendiug that
governments derive their just powers
from the consent Of the governed"
These modern critics of jefferson and
the principles Of 1916 know very well that
the intent and meaning Of the great Dec
laration was not that no man should be
governed except by his own consent, that
no set Of men should be governed except
by their consent, that there could be no
punishment for crime except by the con-
sent CT the criminal. They well know that
it did not mean that a majority OF ali the
citizens should be permitted to partici-
pate in the franchise by which the func
tionarles of government were chosen. II
there was even a shadow OF doubt on the
subject. both contemporaneous and subse'
quent construction would dissipate it.
From the inception OF our Government
more than two-fhirds of the citizens were
denied this privilege by reason Of the dis
qualification Of sex and minority in age.
Additional dssqualificatiohs were estab-
ilshed in certain States. such as inability
10 read and write and delinquency in the
payment of taxes. The declaration OF 1916
was directed not to the internal affairs OF
the State. not to the right OF suffrage and
amending qualifications, but rather to the
rights OF the people as a people. as COM
munity. in their aggregate capacity; the
right TO be free from the dominion of a
sovereign having little or no interest in
common with themseiyes Il meant self
government as opposed to colonial govern
ment. AS matter OF fact. the right OF
suffrage was denied the colored citizen in
number of the Northern States down TO
the time OF the adoption Of the fifteenth
amendment. Nor have the new constitu-
lions OF South Carolina or Mississippi con
aicted with the letter of the fifteenth
amendment. and no negro having the com
rnorest sort OF education is deprived by
these States. or by any other Southern
state. OF his right to vote. II the spirit Of
the amendment is a guaranty Of the fran
chlse to illiterate negroes, then the spirit
Of the Constitution is to that extent vio-
lated. and the validity OF the State con-
s,itutionai provisions on the subject is
question for the courts to dispose of when
brought before them. Besides. the educa-
tionsl qualification is not peculiar TO the
South It also prevails in Northern States.
rotably III Massachusetts,.
In any event. therefore. this franchise
disqualification has absolutely nothing to