FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157  
158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   >>  
those who had been elected as Republicans were free silver men. On that question they were in harmony with a majority of the Democrats, and out of harmony with the great majority of Republicans. The Free Silver Republicans, therefore, were not inclined to support a measure that was particularly offensive to their friends and allies on the silver question. After a careful canvass of the Senate it was developed that the Republican leaders could not safely count on the support of any one of the Free Silver Republicans in their efforts to pass the bill, and, since they had the balance of power, any further effort to pass it was abandoned. It was then made plain to the friends and supporters of that measure that no further attempt would be made in that direction for a long time, if ever. I wrote and had published in the Washington _Post_ a letter in which I took strong grounds in favor of having the representation in Congress,--from States where the colored men had been practically disfranchised through an evasion of the Fifteenth Amendment,--reduced in the manner prescribed by the Fourteenth Amendment. In that letter I made an effort to answer every argument that had been made in opposition to such a proposition. It had been argued by some fairly good lawyers, for instance, that the subsequent ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment had so modified the Fourteenth as to take away from Congress this optional and discretionary power which had been previously conferred upon it by the Fourteenth Amendment. I tried in that letter,--and I think I succeeded,--to answer the argument on that point. It was also said that if Congress were to take such a step it would thereby give its sanction to the disfranchisement of the colored men in the States where that had been done. This I think I succeeded in proving was untrue and without foundation. The truth is that the only material difference between the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments on this particular point is that, subsequent to the ratification of the Fourteenth and prior to the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment, a State could legally disfranchise white or colored men on account of race or color, but, since the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment, this cannot be legally done. If, then, Congress had the constitutional right under the Fourteenth Amendment to punish a State in the manner therein prescribed, for doing what the State then had a legal and constitutional ri
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   151   152   153   154   155   156   157  
158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   >>  



Top keywords:

Amendment

 

Fourteenth

 

Fifteenth

 

ratification

 

Republicans

 

Congress

 

letter

 

colored

 
majority
 

silver


effort
 

succeeded

 

subsequent

 
question
 

States

 
harmony
 
Silver
 

answer

 

friends

 

measure


support

 

constitutional

 
argument
 

prescribed

 
legally
 

manner

 

modified

 

optional

 
conferred
 

discretionary


previously

 

material

 

account

 

disfranchise

 

punish

 

proving

 

untrue

 

disfranchisement

 
sanction
 
foundation

Amendments

 

difference

 

instance

 

leaders

 

safely

 

Republican

 

developed

 

canvass

 

Senate

 

abandoned