December 13th, at this stage of the debate, Mr. Sumner said:--

MR. PRESIDENT,--I have already voted against the motion to strike

out the word “male,” and I shall vote against the pending proposition

to fix an educational test. In each case I am governed by the same

consideration.

In voting against striking out the word “male,” I did not intend to

express any opinion on the question, which has at last found its

way into the Senate Chamber, whether women shall be invested with

the elective franchise. That question I leave untouched, contenting

myself with the remark, that it is obviously the great question of the

future,--at least one of the great questions,--which will be easily

settled, whenever the women in any considerable proportion insist that

it shall be settled. And so, in voting against an educational test, I

do not mean to say that under other circumstances such test may not be

proper. But I am against it now.

The present bill is for the benefit of the colored race in the District

of Columbia. It completes Emancipation by Enfranchisement. It entitles

all to vote without distinction of color. The courts and the rail-cars

of the District, even the galleries of Congress, have been opened.

The ballot-box must be opened also. Such is my sense not only of

the importance, but of the necessity of this measure, so essential

does it appear to me for the establishment of peace, security, and

reconciliation, which I so earnestly covet, that I am unwilling to see

it clogged, burdened, or embarrassed by anything else. I wish to vote

on it alone. Therefore, whatever the merits of other questions, I have

no difficulty in putting them aside until this is settled.

The bill for Impartial Suffrage in the District of Columbia concerns

directly some twenty thousand colored persons, whom it will lift to

the adamantine platform of Equal Rights. If regarded simply in its

influence on the District, it would be difficult to exaggerate its

value; but when regarded as an example to the whole country, under the

sanction of Congress, its value is infinite. In the latter character it

becomes a pillar of fire to illumine the footsteps of millions. What we

do here will be done in the disorganized States. Therefore we must be

careful that what we do here is best for the disorganized States.

If the bill could be confined in influence to the District, I should

have little objection to an educational test as an experiment. But

it cannot be limited to any narrow sphere. Practically, it takes the

whole country into its horizon. We must, therefore, act for the whole

country. This is the exigency of the present moment.

Now to my mind nothing is clearer than the present necessity of

suffrage for all colored persons in the disorganized States. It

will not be enough, if you give it to those who read and write; you

will not in this way acquire the voting force needed there for the

protection of Unionists, whether white or black. You will not secure

the new allies essential to the national cause. As you once needed the

muskets of blacks, so now you need their votes,--and to such extent

that you can act with little reference to theory. You are bound by

the necessity of the case. Therefore, when asked to open suffrage

to women, or when asked to establish an educational standard for

our colored fellow-citizens, I cannot, on the present bill, simply

because the controlling necessity under which we act will not allow

it. By a singular Providence, we are constrained to this measure of

Enfranchisement for the sake of peace, security, and reconciliation,

so that loyal persons, white or black, may be protected, and that the

Republic may live. Here, in the national capital, we begin the real

work of Reconstruction, by which the Union will be consolidated forever.

The amendment of Mr. Dixon was rejected,--Yeas 11, Nays 34.

The Senators voting in the affirmative were Mr. Anthony, Mr.

Buckalew, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Doolittle, Mr. Fogg, Mr. Foster, Mr.

Hendricks, Mr. Nesmith, Mr. Patterson, Mr. Riddle, and Mr.

Willey.

The bill then passed the Senate,--Yeas 32, Nays 13. On the

next day it passed the other House, and, being vetoed by

President Johnson, it passed both Houses by a two-thirds vote,

so that it became a law.[75]

Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 14 (of 20) · 第 91 / 125 题