Communipaw [James McCune Smith] to Frederick Douglass, March 26, 1859

THE SUFFRAGE RESOLUTIONS.

MR. EDITOR:—Your paper states, on the authority of Mr. Stephen Myers of Albany, that the "Equal Suffrage resolutions" passed the Assembly on the 23d inst.; the same statement appeared in several New York pa ers of the 24th. On looking at the Daily Times of the latter date, you will find the following:

The question of negro suffrage was up this morning, arising on the question of agreeing to the concurrent resolutions of Senator Scott, proposing an amendment to the Constitution. They were briefly debated by Messrs. Fuller, Buffington, Andrus, Hubbell, Shepard and others. Mr. Gover, who said that he spoke for his party, truly prophesying that the Dem0 ocrats would vote against them. All the Democrats but Mr. Lamont voted nay; of the Republicans, only Mr. Meeks, of Queens, voted with the Democrats, and of the Americans only Mr. King, of Erie. Following are the resolutions:

Resolved, That section two of article two of the Constitution of this State be amended so as to read as follows:

Section 2. Laws may be passed excluding from the right of suffrage all persons who have been or may be convicted of bribery, or larceny, or of any infamous crime, or who may be convicted of receiving or consenting to receive a bribe; and also depriving every elector who shall make or become directly or indirectly interested in any bet or wager depending upon the result of any election, or who shall, in reference to any election, or with the intent to affect, wholly or in part, the result thereof, do any act prohibited by the laws of this State, relating to elections, from the right to vote at such election, and from holding any office for which he shall received votes at such election.

Resolved, (if the Assembly concur.) That the foregoing amendment be referred to the Legislature to be chosen at the next general election of Senators; and that, in conformity to section one of article thirteen of the Constitution, it be published for three months previous to the time of such election.

The vote was as follows:

AYES—Messrs. Abbot, Andrus, Batcheller, Bingham, Bliss, Boughton, Bowen, Briggs, Brockway, Buffington, Bump, Chamberlain, S. S. Childs, Clark, Cobb, Coburn, Coit, Coleman,

Collins, Conklin, Costello, Davis, Earle, Eveland, Filkins, Fuller, Godard, Grant, H. K. Graves, S. Graves, Green, Hall, Holmes, Hubbell, Hutchinson, Johnson, Ladue, Laing, Lamont, Longenhelt, Lockhart, Loomis, L. R. Lyon, Macking, Mckeel, Meserole, Miller, Moore, Morris, Moulton, S. E. Palmer, Payne, Pelton, Pendell, Perry, Pierce, Plato, Pond, Powell, Ranney, Rider, Rodgers, Schofield, See, Shaw, Shepard, Speaker, C. S. Spencer, Stewart, St. John, Sweeney, C. Thomas, D. Thomas, Thompson, Tuthill, Van Horn, Van Volkenburgh, Wever, Wiggins, Wiley, Wintermute, H. W. Spencer, Woodbury—83.

NAYS—Messrs. N. A. Childs, Christie, Cornelius, Creble, Fitzgerald, Gardner, Heermance, Jeremiah, King, Lawrence, Macomber, Mallery, Meeks, G. P. Palmer, Smith, Suydam, Van Cortlandt, Warner, Wilson, Young—21; absent or not voting, 24.

I confess that to my vision the above does not look like the "Equal Suffrage resolutions." Sec. 2 of Act of our State Constitution provides that "no man of color shall vote unless he is seized and possessed of two hundred and fifty dollars worth of real estate," &c. How, then, will the above amendment, even when carried by the popular vote in 1860, grant "equal suffrage to colored persons?" If carried as an amendment, it will be only added to the section as it now reads in the Constitution, and will leave the property qualification untouched, because the property qualification being an affirmative provision in the Constitution, can only be removed, as it was adopted, by a striking out, or negative vote quoad hoc, on the part of the people, who alone have the power to alter the constitution.

It may be a very shrewd dodge on the part of our Legislators, to submit the suffrage question to the people's vote, avoiding the damaging phrase "equal suffrage to colored persons," but, depend upon it, such a dodge will be more likely to deprive us of the franchise entirely, than to restore it to us entirely; and, for the following reasons:

1. The special clause in the Constitution, fixing the conditions on which colored men may vote, being abolished, as will be claimed, if anything be claimed by adopting the above

Assembly amendment, there will be no clause in the constitution which grants, under any conditions, the right to vote to colored men.

2. If we go to the polls and claim to vote under the first clause of Art. 2 of the Constitution, "that all male citizens of the age of 21 years," &c., &c., shall be entitled to vote, any inspector of election may refuse our votes on the ground that we are not voting citizens and were not included in that class when the Constitution of 1846 was adopted. A parallel instance occurred the other day in Congress. When the "Homestead Bill" came up several years ago, the Hon. Gerrit Smith voted against it, because its restricted its benefits to free white citizens, or persons. Since that time, the Dred Scott decision, according to general belie, has declared that colored persons are not citizens of the United States; and in the Homestead Bill which passed the House, last Congress, the word "white" is left out, because they who framed, and the majority who voted for the bill, believed that blacks were excluded just as effectually as if the word white had been inserted.

3. It is no reply to these objections, that the dominant party in this State (the Repubican) will interpret the amendment above mentioned in our favor; for this would reduce our tenure of the franchise, to the period when that party shall be in power, as well as to the prevailing will of the party. Should the Democrats, or the Americans, or some yet unformed party obtain power in this State, they would interpret the amendment, for, or against our voting as might suit them best.—And when you remember how many Republicans stopped your paper last autumn because you exercised your right to speak, write and vote for the Abolition candidate for Governor, it requires no stretch of the imagination to picture a possibly contingency in which the Republicans themselves, even in power, would avail themselves of any legal fiction which would deprive colored men of their votes entirely. Should the colored vote, at any Gubernatorial or Presidential election, threaten to deprive the Republicans of their President

or Governor, would they have their magnanimous love of abstract right and freedom of choice, to admit that vote, if they had the power to reject it by any indirection? Would any political party, under like circumstances, admit the negro vote?

4. We have suffered so much, in this land, by ingenious and barefaced misinterpretations of the plainest principles of organic law, that we should be the last persons to avail ourselves of chicanery even in the hope of regaining a lost right. We are yet so few and powerless, that it is safe for us to rely upon nothing less than clearly expressed and firmly grounded acts or laws; it would be a moral as well as a political suicide to avail ourselves of a right obtained by stealing a march on the people. Those familiar with her secrets, tell us that nature, in looking for a substance which should undergo the most tremendous pressure without yielding to compression, has selected, not gold, nor iron, nor brass, nor any of her demi-urgic products which can be made to change their outward appearance—no, she selected pure and unadulterated water, the perennial symbol of purity and innocence; so we, whom nature's divine Master has placed in a position where the concentrated pressure of the fiercest passions which ever stirred society bear down upon us, can only resist this pressure by retaining the purity and innocency which belong to first principles.

History will record it to our credit, that while under the property qualification clause, we could all vote with slight, if any impediment; yet our regard for the solemnity of our oaths restrained us, except where we could sear to the literal truth. In like manner we had better remain partially disfranchised, than accept the suffrage on a basis which would inflict a deeper wound on the public faith, and on constitutional law, than the one under which we partially suffer. For I contend, that if the amendment proposed and adopted by the Assembly, shall grant us the suffrage, the

this precedent—dangerous to all liberty—will be established: that the Legislature may take up any article or section of the Constitution of the State, adopt a resolution to supply its place with an amendment entirely foreign to its subject matter, and then, by submitting this last, actually lead the people to alter the Constitution without voting for or against the clause which they do alter.

For example, Art. 2, Sec. 1, of the Constitution of New York grants the right of voting to all male citizens. Let the Legislature pass a resolution to amend Art. 2, Sec. 1, so as to read, "every hospital in this State shall be entitled to receive ten thousand dollars a year from the State Treasury." Which, being a benevolent and praiseworthy grant, would command a majority of the votes in the State. And when thus adopted, the powers that be would declare all male citizens disfranchised, with as good reason as any one could declare us enfranchised by the popular adoption of the Assembly amendment quoted above.

We ought, therefore, to oppose this form of an alleged franchise movement, because it is builded upon a greater evil to the State than the partial disfranchisement under which we suffer.

Yours,

COMMUNIPAW.

NEW YORK, March 26th, 1859.

P. S.—Having expressed my warm admiration of the position and labors of Mr. Downing in Rhode Island, I feel constrained to record my dissent from the assault made by PHILO, in your last, upon the amiable and estimable lady who has the misfortune to teach the colored school in Providence.

In our equal-school war, colored teachers of colored schools should under all circum stances, demand our sympathy; it is as natural in them to oppose us, as it was in the weavers forty years ago to raise mobs to put down the power looms. And when our opponent is a lady, gallantry should say—forbear.