Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 15 (of 20)Sumner, Charles
History
Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 15 (of 20)
Sumner, Charles
Slavery -- United States; Speeches, addresses, etc., American
MY DEAR SIR,--You wish to have the North “reconstructed,” so
at least that it shall cease to deny the elective franchise on
account of color. But you postpone the day by insisting on the
preliminary of a Constitutional Amendment. I know your vows to
the good cause; but I ask you to make haste. We cannot wait.
Of course, we can always wait for the needful processes; but
there are present reasons why we should allow no time to be lost.
_This question must be settled forthwith_: in other words, it
must be settled before the Presidential election, now at hand.
Our colored fellow-citizens at the South are already electors.
They will vote at the Presidential election. But why should they
vote at the South, and not at the North? The rule of justice is
the same for both. Their votes are needed at the North as well
as the South. There are Northern States where their votes can
make the good cause safe beyond question. There are other States
where their votes will be like the last preponderant weight in
the nicely balanced scales. Let our colored fellow-citizens vote
in Maryland, and that State, now so severely tried, will be fixed
for Human Rights forever. Let them vote in Pennsylvania, and
you will give more than twenty thousand votes to the Republican
cause. Let them vote in New York, and the scales, which hang
so doubtful, will incline to the Republican side. It will be
the same in Connecticut. I mention these by way of example. But
everywhere the old Proslavery party will kick the beam. Let all
this be done, I say, before the next Presidential election.
Among the proposed ways is a new Constitutional Amendment. But
this is too dilatory. It cannot become operative till after
the Presidential election. Besides, it is needless. Instead of
amending the Constitution, read it.
Another way is by moving each State, and obtaining through
local legislation what is essentially _a right of citizenship_.
But this again is too dilatory, while it turns each State into
a political maelström, and submits a question of _National_
interest to the chances of local controversy and the timidity of
local politicians. This will not do. Emancipation was a National
act, proceeding from the National Government, and applicable
to all the States. Enfranchisement, which is the corollary
and complement of Emancipation, must be a National act also,
proceeding from the National Government, and applicable to all
the States. If left to the States individually, the result,
besides being tardy, will be uncertain and fragmentary.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account