Year: 1863

Union, and subverting civil liberty in the
free States. Everywhere he was received
with enthusiasm and appreciation hun.
dreds upon hundreds turned out to meet
him at every point. His canvass in Sus-
sex was a success-a triumph--a demon.
stration of popular approval, encouraging
to the Democracy, but withering to the
hopes of Mr.. Smithers and the Aboliti
lists. The same state Of facts existed in
Kent. While the Republicans could
scarcely muster enough men at many
points ojustify their speakers in attempting
to address them, the Democratic meetings |
were large and enthusiastic, showing, be-
yondmistake that Mr.. Brown would be elec-
ted by an overwhelming majority if there
was no military interference.


1t had been given out by Mr.. Smithers
and his friends that the election should be
perfectly fair and equal, and that no mill
tary interference would be permitted-and
such we have no doubt was their original
intention; but the canvas, of the State sat-
isfed Mr.. Smithers and his party that
Mr.. Brown would be elected, and that
greenbacks, by means of which they at
first hoped to succeed could not prevent it.
Convinced that Smithers would be defeated
by large majority unless something could
be done to prevent the people from voting
the Abolition party of the State invoked
Federal interposition. This was done,
and General Orders, No. So" was issued
we believe, at the special instance and re.
quest of Mr.. Smithers and the leading
Abolitonists Of the State. We are aware
that they deny all completely with the
matter, and affect to regret the military in
reference that was had with the election,
but we do not believe them-we cannot
believe that General Schenck would have
disregardedshc wishes of Mr.. Smithers,
whose election he was anxious to promote,
and we know that William Cannon would
never have endorsed the order as he did
without the permission of Mr. Smithers.


In their desperation they have trampled
upon the most sacred rights Of the people
OF the State, and now meanly attempt to
transfer to Gen, Schenck the odium which
justly attaches to themselves. Scbenck
has his own share of blame but not all
the sin is his. We have not time now to
examine critically this military order full
minated against the Democracy of Della.
ware-bnt we will say, in passing that no
such class of evil disposed persons exist in
Delaware as is referred to in the preamble
of General Orders, No. So" unless, in.
deed, it be the Abolitionists themselves,
who a year ago did disturb the public
peace and prevent fair election by bring
ing military force into the State to de-
feat the Democratic party, thereby proving
that they do not recognize allegiance to


Constitution and laws of the country or Of
the State. This military order professe:
to provide test Of citizenship, and tc


make that test the qualification of an elec


tor-a test not prescribed by any law o.
Congress, because no such law can be con.


sttutionally enacted nor by the Consti'


tuition and laws Of the State, but by a


higher power than either Constitution OIL


laws, according to Abolition teaching:


and practice. The Democracy Of Della


ware have not thus been taught, and al


though without the disposition or tht


power to maintain their constitutions


rights against the military power of th'


General Government, they nevertheless


refused to acknowledge the right of a mill
tary commander to prescribe the term


upon which they could exercise the privil


oge of voting. The qualification Of al
elector is specifically defined by the Con
stitution of the State, and every persol
qualified according to that instrument ha
the right to vote-a right Of which he can
not be rightfully deprived by any powe
on earth-and any additional qualification


prescribed by military authority is super


sedeas of the Constitution of the State an


a virtual disfranchisement of the citizen
The laws of the State prescribe the man
ner in which elections shall be held, an
guard by stringent provisions the righ
of every qualified citizen to vote as h


pleases. This General Order No. SO
sets at defiance the laws of State in thi


behalf, and compels officers, of election
under threats to be executed by proves
marshals and military detachments place
at the polls for that purpose, to disregar'


the statue-laws of the State. and to yiel,


obedience to the mandate of militar


commander. Troops were sent into th