Year: 1869

/ =-----------------


senator Summers Speech ON ,h. a. g..vs
Question.


Senator Sumner is perhaps the most am;
| nent of the advocates of the regulation Of snf.


frage in the States by Congressional legisla-
ton. To statesmen of his school the uncer.


tainty with regard to the adoption by three
| fourths of the States of an impartial suffrage
amendment is a sufficient reason for proceed
ing at once to the desired object by the short
est possible route. Mr.. Sumner supported his
views in an able speech in the Senate, Friday
from which we make the following extract:
The rule under the national Constitution,
especially since its additional amend
ments, is that anything fo- human rights is
constitutional Against the old rule, any,
thing for slavery, put the new rule any
thing for human rights. On this constitution
al principle, he challenged any one and all to
the debate. A State exercises its proper
functions when, within its own jurisdiction, it
administers local law, watches local interests
promotes local charities, and by its local
knowledge brings the guardianship of the gov
ernment to the homes of its citizens. Such is
the proper function of State, by which we
are saved from that Capitalization which Il
elsewhere so absorbing, but State transcends
Its proper function when it interferes with
those equal rights whether civil or political.
which by the Declaration of Independeuce
and the repeated texts Of the national consti-
tuition, are under the safeguard of the nation
The State is local in its character and not uni
versal. Whatever is justly local belongs to its
cognizance; whatever is universal belongs to
the nation; but what can be more universal
than the rights of man; such they have been
declared by our fathers, and this axiom of lib
erty nobody can dispute. 81 do not" he said,
"err, when say that this whole terrible and
ignominious pretension is traced to q direct
and barefaced perversion of the national Con.
stitution. Search history, study constitutions,
examine laws, and you will find no perversion
more revolving"


He then proceeded to argue from the proyi-
sions of the Constitution in regard to the
time place and manner OF holding elections
for Senators and Representatives, that Con-
gress had the right to prescribe the qualfica-
tions of electors. Everything from these
champions Of States rights, he said, begins and
ends in the perversion of two words: "qualifi-
cations" and regulations" Now to this per-
version I oppose point-blank denial These
two words are not justly susceptible of any
such signifcation, especially in national con-
stitution which is to be interpreted always 40
that human rights shall not suffer. He argu-
ed that as qualification must be something
that can be acquired, and as the color of a
mans skin is fixed immutably by Providence
it was absurd to claim that color was one of
the qualifications of suffrage, which it was in
the province of the States to impose under the
Constitution. He also discussed the true
meaning of the term regulation" as employ
ed in the Constitution in connection with cleo
tors and elections. A power to regulate is
not power to dsfranchise or destroy. In an
evil hour human rights may be struck, but
cannot be merely by regulation. sar- 5ee6g


Mr.. Sumner argued at length against the as
sumption that under the Constitution the pow
er of suffrage belongs to the States, and
summed up his argument upon il In two prop
ositions-hrst, that there Is absolutely nothing
49,.
sion of caste or oligarchy of skin as set up by
certain States, and, secondly, that there is in
the national Constitution a succession and re-
duplication of powers investing Congress with
ample authority to repress any such preten-
sion. He then considered two reasons assign
ed for preferring constitutional amendment
to an act of Congress as a means of securing
equal suffrage, viz: first, doubtfulness of pow
er of Congress, and, second, greater permaueI-
cy OF an amendment. In reply to the first, he
insisted that the power of Congress was not
doubtful, and in reply to the second he said
that he had no fear that suffrage once given
would ever be taken away. La conclusion he
considered the reasons which made them hes
itate to submit this amendment. There were
two: the amendment admits that under the
national Constitution as it is with its recent
additions, caste and an Oligarchy of skin
may be set up by the State, without any check
from Congress- That these ignobls forms of
inequality are consistent with a republican
government, and that the right to vote is not
an existing privilege and immunity of citizen
ship, all this is plainly admitted by the pro-
posed amendment, thus despoiling Congress of
beneficent powers and emasculating the ma
tional Constitution ITSELF 1t was only with
infinite reluctance that he could consent to
any such admission, which, in endeavoring to
satisfy ungenerous scruples, weakens all those
texts which are SO important for human rights.
Hesitation to present the amendment is in
creased, wnen we consider the difficulties in
. the way of its ratification. am no arithme-
tician, but understand that no one has yet
been able to enumerate the States whose votes
can be counted on, to assure its ratification
within any reasonable time.


After considering the difficulties likely to
arise from the submission of the amendment
from q prolonged and bitter political contro-
versy, which would be increased by its enemies
to the greatest possible extent, he said:-"But,
happily all these are unnecessary. The same
thing may be accomplished by an act of Con-
gress without any delay, without any uncer-
tainty and without any pr0vocation to local
strife. The same vote OF two-thirds required
for the presentation of the amendmentsw will
pass the act over the veto of the President.
Once adopted it will go into instant operation
without waiting for the uncertain concurrence
of State legislatures, and without provoking
local strife so wearisome to the country. The
States will not be turned into political cal
drons, and the democratic party will have no
puddng-stick with which to stir the boiling
mass. / do not depart from the proprieties of
of this occasion when show how completely
the course now propose harmonizes with the
requirements of the political party to which I be
long. Believing most sincerely that the Repub-
lican party in its objects is identical with the
country and with mankind, SO that in sustain
ing it sustain those comprehensive charities.
cannot willingly see this agency lose the op-
portunity of confirming its supremacy. You
need votes in Connecticut, do you not? There
are three thousand fellow citizens in that
State ready at the call of Congress to take
their place at the ballot box. You need them
also in Pennsylvania do yoR not? There are
at least fifteen thousand in that great State
waiting for your summons, Wherever you
most need them there they are, and be assured
they will all vote for those who stand by them
In the assertion of equal rights. But in stand
ing by them you stand by all which IL most
dear in the republic. Pardon me, but If you
are not moved by considerations OF justice un-
der the Constitution, then appeal to that
humble motive which is found in the desire
for success. Do this, and you viii assure the
triumph of all that you can most desire. The
party, country and mankind will be elevated
while the equal rights of all will be fixed ON a
foundation not less enduring than the rock of
ages"