Year: 1869

The Parkersbnrg Times has its plan for
admitting TO the ballot the disfran-
chised citizens of this State. Its is in
favor of amending the first section of
the Third Article of the Constitution so
as to read as follows:


"No person who, since the first day of
April, 1861, has given aid or shall give
voluntary aid or assistance to the Re-
bellion against the United States, shall
be citizen of this State, or allowed to
vote at any election held therein. But
the Legislature may, by a rote Of tloo-thirds
Of each House, remove such disability"


Such an amendment would not reach
the cases in which disfranchisement is
most shameful. Thousands of men are
prescribed in West Virginia not because
of their participation in the rebellion,
but by the arbitrary acts of Registrars,
who deem no man "loyal" unless he
votes the Republican ticket. These
cases, wherein the registration law oper-
ates most iniquitously, wOnld not be
reached by the proposed amendment.
The Legislature might remove the diSa-
bilities of every man who took part in
the rebellion, and yet not relieve
the citizens of Barbour or Jetfer-
son counties, who are prescribed simply
on account of the ticket they vote.
There can be no such extension of the
franchise as the times demand without
such revision of the Registration law as
will not only require the Registrars to es-
tablish their cases agai nst parties sum-
moned, but make these officers heavily
responsible and secure the right
of appeal to parties aggrieved
by unjust decisions. 1t is nonsense for
the Radicals to pretend to enfranChise
the men who fought in the Southern
armies when they drive from the ballot
box many of the best Union men of the
State.


Other objections to the Times propo-
sition readily occur. Every disfran'
chised white man in the State ought to
vote. The discrimination" sought to be
made would simply enfranchise those
who are favorites with the Republican
party and disfranchise those who are not,
and that, too, when they have no right
to disfranchise anybody in this way,
What disgusts the people most with
this prescription is that it deprives men
Of franchises and property without
due process of law" Whe ever heard et
furnishing offences in this country
by legislative enactment, until the
Radical party found they couldn't
cenviot rebels before the Courts
and therefore fouzd refuge aud
revenge in registration aud arbitrary
disfranchisement The clemency OF
which the Times boasts amounts to
nothing. The Radicals whom 1t repre-
sents would have hung rebels by the
hundred had conviction before the
Courts been possible. Disfranchisement
is Just this much of a penalty which
could not be enforced by regular prose
cution. If our Radical trierds thlnk
Otherwise, the difference in opinion sug'
gests a practical method of "discriml'
mating against the more guilty, q policy
thev deem to favor. Let them repeal
the suffrage amendment entire,
and institute prosecutions for treason
against those whom they want dis
franchised. Erery man ooaricted will
lose his right to vote. Why not try
that, Messrs Republicans If you are
right in your claim that these men are
guilty of crime punishable before the
Courts, you can disfranchise all oono1'
ious ones, aHd at the same time silence
the clamor now raised because you are
inflicting punishment in violation o.
law.