“It is proposed, by a solemn provision of the Constitution,
to declare that certain persons shall not be included
in the basis of representation. I think, in justice to
them, they should not be taxed. You ought not to repeat
in the Constitution the tyranny of taxation without
representation. In so many words, you are about to despoil
fellow-citizens of representation, and I say, that, not to
be inconsistent with your own institutions and with the
principles upon which your government is founded, you must
exempt them from taxation.”
The amendment was rejected.
The question then came on the passage of the House proposition,
when the vote stood,--
YEAS,--Messrs. Anthony, Chandler, Clark, Conness, Cragin,
Creswell, Fessenden, Foster, Grimes, Harris, Howe, Kirkwood,
Lane of Indiana, McDougall, Morgan, Morrill, Nye, Poland,
Ramsey, Sherman, Sprague, Trumbull, Wade, Williams, and Wilson.
NAYS,--Messrs. Brown, Buckalew, Cowan, Davis, Dixon, Doolittle,
Guthrie, Henderson, Hendricks, Johnson, Lane of Kansas,
Nesmith, Norton, Pomeroy, Riddle, Saulsbury, Stewart, Stockton,
Sumner, Van Winkle, Willey, and Yates.
ABSENT,--Messrs. Foot, Howard, and Wright.
The Chair then declared: “On this question the Yeas are 25 and
the Nays 22. Two thirds of the Senators present not having
voted for the joint resolution, it is not agreed to.”
This vote showed the judgment of the Senate at that time. But,
in order to keep the question open, it was, on motion of Mr.
Henderson, reconsidered. Mr. Doolittle, of Wisconsin, then
moved a substitute, basing representation on qualified voters,
and also regulating direct taxes. Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, offered
another substitute, founded on qualified voters, but with
nothing on direct taxes. While these were pending, the subject
was postponed on motion of Mr. Fessenden, and never resumed.
Much feeling was manifested by some of the supporters of the
House attempt at amendment, when its defeat was known. Mr.
Stevens, of Pennsylvania, took an early occasion to say:--
“It was slaughtered by a puerile and pedantic criticism, by
a perversion of philological definition, which, if, when
I taught school, a lad who had studied Lindley Murray had
assumed, I would have expelled him from the institution
as unfit to waste education upon.… The murderers must
answer to the suffering race. I would not have been the
perpetrator. A load of misery must sit heavy on their
souls.… Let us again try and see whether we cannot devise
some way to overcome the united forces of self-righteous
Republicans and unrighteous Copperheads.”[202]
The Fourteenth Amendment followed, and was adopted by
both Houses of Congress during the present session. While
undertaking to regulate representation, this Amendment had
no recognition of exclusion from the elective franchise on
account of “race or color.” Though failing in directness, there
was nothing in it to injure the text of the Constitution, or
impair the idea of a republican form of government, always with
Mr. Sumner a cardinal point. There were also other important
clauses, defining citizenship, assuring for all “the equal
protection of the laws,” disqualifying certain persons from
office until the removal of such disability by a vote of two
thirds of each House of Congress, protecting the public debt of
the United States, and annulling all debts in aid of rebellion
or on account of the loss or emancipation of any slave.
The original object of the clause relating to representation
was accomplished directly, before its ratification as part of
the Constitution. After much debate, Congress yielded to the
claim of power, and took jurisdiction of the elective franchise
in the Rebel States, requiring, that, in voting on any State
constitution in the reconstruction of the Rebel States, there
should be no exclusion on account of race or color, and
that this prohibition should be embodied in the new State
constitutions.[203] The Fifteenth Constitutional Amendment on
equal suffrage followed.
Unquestionably the establishment of the equal rights of colored
citizens at the ballot-box was one of the most important events
in our political history. With few supporters at first, the
cause grew in interest and strength until final success in
the Acts of Reconstruction, and then in the Constitutional
Amendment. This great result was accomplished by discussion and
the gradual recognition of the national exigency.