Year: 1871




test in a community like ours must in
evitably lead to two results: First, it
must, in the long run, excite bad feel
ing and produce disorder, instead Of as
suaging the former and preventing the
latter. The reason is simple. You
cannot expect a people to become, or
be, or remain loyal, if you demand OF
them the performance Of all the duties
Of citizenship without granting to them
the corresponding rights. Thus, in Mis-
souri, the late rebels were generally dis
posed to conduct themselves as quiet,
law-abiding citizens, and the only vic,
lent disturbances Of a political nature
which we had to deplore arose directly
from their exclusion from all political
rights. No sooner was disfranchisement
removed, than those disturbances ceased
altogether, and we may now enjoy per-
feet repose and order and general good
feeling.


The second inevitable result of dis
franchisement is this: Disfranchisement
is necessarily used by one party to keep
the other down. In fact, that is its OBJ
ject. Inasmuch as the ruling party
fixes the tests Of disfranchisement,
which will always be somewhat arbi-
trary, and also applies them through
its own instruments, the natural ten
dency will be that the ruling party
keeps itself in power simply by permit
ting as few as possible of its opponents
to vote, and this is not found TO be very
difficult. OF course, the most unscru-
pulous politicians are in such things
the most useful, and being the most
useful, they will soon become very In
huential. The result is that the party
organization falls soon under the man
agement of the most untrustworthy ele-
ment, for party tyranny and corruption
90 hand in hand. You give a party,
however pure it may be at the start,
the power to beat its opponents by sim
ply keeping them away from the polls,
instead OF gaining the popular favor by
good conduct, and it will soon lie an
offensive mass OF decentralization, and
utterly unfit for good government.


EFFECT on MISSOURI.


Yes, look at Missouri! There was no
State in this Union where the war was
carried on with bloodier ierociiy, where
society was more fercely rackci and
convulsed by political passion, and
where neighbor prosecuted neighbor,
nay, where brother prosecuted brother,
with more relentless hatred. Look at
it now, and then point out to me SIN
gle State, not only among those that
were the scene Of civil war and neigh
borhood feuds, but even among those in
which no rebel soldier or guerilla ever
fired gun. Show me one where to-
day more perfect peace and quiet pre-
vail, where the rights Of the emanci-
patcd slave are more generally and CON-
pletely respected, and where all classes
of society, in spite of their former ami
mosities, work together in more cordial
harmony; in one word, where the saw
age passions of the war have giverway
to a more complete restoration of fra
ternal feeling! Show me one! You
will search in vain.


THE KU.KLUX ELL.


and others voted against the Ku.
Klux bill, not because We were inditfer-
ent to the suppression of wrong and
outrage, Indifferent to the protection Of
the Union men of the South, for our
hearts beat as warmly for the sufferers
as the hearts Of others; but because il
is against the most essential principles
Of our constitutional system that the
President should be invested with the
almost dictatorial power which the Ku-
Klux act gives him, to declare and treat
as a rebellion, according to his own
arbitrary judgment, any combination
merely capable of mischief, although
no mischief may have been overly
committed, and then to march troops
into a State without any requisition
from Governor or Legislature, and 10
suspend the writ Of haJeaS corpus, that
great safeguard against arbitrary power,
according to his sovereign pleasure. We
voted against this act, not as il we had
been unwilling to protect the lives and
rights and liberties OF those who need
it in the South, but because the manner
in which the protection is proposed is
involving great dangers to the rights
and liberties Of all. And we refused to
grant such powers to the Executive, not
because the President now in office did
not individually possess our confidence,
but because we could not entrust any
man. and were he ever so great and
good, with such powers to rule over the
American people.


THE SUPREME COURT.


| allude to the reyersion OF the de,
cision of the Supreme Court concerning
the legal-tender act, in consequence ol
the appointment OF two new judges
changing the majority OF the court. II
has been charged that sejudges were
appointed for the very purpose Of effect
ing that end. Whether the charge Is
well founded or not / am not able to
say Of my own knowledge But it i:
certain that almost the whole country
believes it to be but too well founded
and that events have given support tc
that belief Neither do | attach much
importance to the question whether tht
original legal-tender decision was righr
or wrong. That is not the question a
issue. But what is to become of tht
authority Of our courts what of tn,
popular respect TOR the sanctity OF law
what Of the fixity Of constitutional prin
ciples, ifthe practice obtains of packing
the highest tribunal OF justice in tn,
| Rapuhlic like a uard couo,a9