182 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



Mr. Broomall, of Pennsylvania, said : " The 

 bill under consideration sets out that in certain 

 States of the Union the elective franchise is 

 limited to certain families or races of men, to 

 the exclusion of other families and races equally 

 composed of citizens of the United States. 

 This fact will not be denied, and the only ques- 

 tion to be decided is, whether, in this particular, 

 the form of government in those States is re- 

 publican. If my definition and argument be 

 correct, that question is of easy solution. For 

 the families and races excluded there is neither 

 direct nor indirect representation. In them no 

 sovereignty exists. The government, therefore, 

 is that of a class, and not of the entire citizens. 

 It has all the characteristics of an aristocracy. 



"It makes no difference in its favor that the 

 ruling class constitute the majority of the cit- 

 izens. On the other hand, the case of the 

 class excluded is the harder from the fact that 

 it is the minority. If the body of the citizens 

 were excluded, they might by combinations 

 force a kind of justice from their rulers. But, 

 the condition of a disfranchised minority is 

 hopeless indeed. Even the resource of revo- 

 lution is denied to them. 



"If the majority may lawfully disfranchise 

 the minority on account of race or lineage, 

 then may the citizens of South Carolina of Af- 

 rican descent limit the elective franchise to 

 themselves to the exclusion of their white fel- 

 low-citizens. If in the form of government now 

 being constituted there such a limitation should 

 be placed, who in this Hall or in the country 

 would maintain that the government is repub- 

 lican ? Not a single vote could be obtained in 

 either House of Congress for the admission of 

 a State with such a constitution. Now, if it is 

 not republican in South Carolina, where black 

 men are in the majority, to limit the suffrage 

 to black men, with what consistency shall we 

 maintain that it is republican in Ohio, where 

 white men are in the majority, to limit the suf- 

 frage to white men ? Let us beware how we 

 advocate the doctrine that the minority may 

 be lawfully disfranchised on account of lin- 

 eage, lest that doctrine be turned against our- 

 selves, and lest for very shame we be obliged 

 to submit. 



"If it be said that the case I am appre- 

 hending cannot arise, that such a constitution 

 presented by South Carolina and persisted in 

 would insure and perpetuate her exclusion, I 

 reply that the danger is not to be apprehended 

 in that shape. South Carolina will present no 

 such constitution; she will first secure her ad- 

 mission. But State constitutions are subject 

 to change by a majority of the citizens, under 

 certain forms and regulations. The spirit of 

 rivalry existing between the blacks and Dem- 

 ocrats, the war of races which forms so prom- 

 inent a part of the political creed of our oppo- 

 nents, is very likely, if persisted in, to produce 

 its fruits of retaliation. Thus far the blacks, 

 where in the majority, have behaved with a 

 wonderful degree of forbearance ; but who shall 



answer for its continuance under continual 

 provocation ? It will be from the exercise of 

 virtue more than human, if the black majority 

 of South Carolina do not imitate the white 

 majority elsewhere, and after admission do not 

 change the constitution by inserting the word 

 4 black,' as a qualification for voting, to cor- 

 respond with the word ' white' in the consti- 

 tutions of other States. We have no right to 

 expect that they will be better than we are, 

 after all their degradation, after all the op- 

 pression they have undergone at our hands. 

 I should be ashamed of the selfishness of my 

 race if I did not believe such an event very 

 likely to occur. Let us be forewarned ! 



"If it be objected to the bill that it proposes 

 to regulate the right of suffrage in the States by 

 congressional action, and that that entire sub- 

 ject is left by the terms of the Constitution to 

 the States themselves, I answer, nothing is left 

 to the States themselves by the terms of the 

 Constitution except subject to the right and 

 duty of the United States to guarantee them a 

 republican form of government. It follows, 

 then, that wherever the want of a republican 

 form appears there we must legislate. If a 

 State should make her offices hereditary, we 

 would be obliged to legislate upon the term 

 and tenure of State offices. If she should shut 

 her courts against every man who could not 

 trace his descent from Adam, or some other 

 ancient celebrity, we would be obliged to legis- 

 late upon the duties of her judges and the 

 rights of suitors in her courts. In like manner 

 if she limit the right of suffrage to a favored 

 part of her citizens and their lineal heirs for- 

 ever, we can do nothing else than legislate upon 

 the question of State suffrage. I repeat, no 

 power whatever is reserved to the States ex- 

 cept subject to the right and duty of the United 

 States to guarantee them a republican form of 

 government. 



"The cause of universal suffrage is the cause 

 of the great laboring masses of the community. 

 "Wherever suffrage is restricted the restriction 

 falls upon them. Nowhere are the poor and 

 the ignorant gifted with political rights and the 

 wealthy and the learned denied them." 



Mr. Woodward, of Pennsylvania, saidj " My 

 objection, sir, to this bill is that it proposes a 

 subversion of the fundamental law of every 

 State that does not tolerate negro suffrage. 

 As Pennsylvania, by her constitution, expressly 

 excludes negro suffrage, this bill, brought 

 forward by a Representative of Pennsylvania, 

 and, for aught I know, a son of Pennsylvania, 

 proposes to subvert the constitution of Penn- 

 sylvania. Such is the effect of the bill ; and the 

 only reason I fear its passage is, that it is sup- 

 ported by precisely the line of argument which 

 I have heard urged in favor of other measures 

 which have been passed. 



" The bill begins by reciting what I must say 

 is not true. In using this language I, of course, 

 mean nothing offensive. I say the statement 

 of the bill is an historical mistake. 





