THE DAILY EVENING TELEG It APII PHI .j A D E L V II l A, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 18G7.
SPIRIT OF THE PRESS.
EDITORIAL OTIWIOHB OF THB LEADING JOTJBSALB
CPOS CPBRHNT TOPICS COMPILED KVKRT
DAT FOB THR KVBMNCI TELEGRAPH.
Ildlcl Exultation at Virginia's Degra
dation. PVowi the iV. Y. Herald.
On the morning of the fir?t day of election
in Louisiana under the reconstruction laws,
we warned the radicals that the success of
their policy in the South would be more than
balanced by decisive defeats at the North. We
lold them that their shouts of exultation at
tie degradation of white men would be re
sponded to by the Great West in such lan
guage as would unmistakably inform the
world whether our recent war was fought for
the preservation of the Union, or for tin
aggrandizement of negroes and the enslave
ment of our own race. How well and fully
theso warnings and prophesies have been real
ized, let the late elections tell. We had hoped
that the rebuke of Ohio and Pennsylvania
would have taught wisdom to the party in
power, and Lave inlluenced its organs to cease
insulting the intelligence of the whites in these
loyal States by claiming victories in the South
which were the necessary results of a most
villanous fraud upon republican liberty, and
that if the farce was to be continued it would
be allowed to do bo in silence.
It seems, however, that the Republican
party is utterly doomed, and that nothing can
Stay its approaching dissolution. Tlie uero
organ in this city, unable to repress its joy at
the success of the recent disgusting spectacle
in Virginia, came out in a double-loaded edi
torial recently, in which the degradation
of the Old Diininion was made the subject
of undisguised pleasure and satisfaction. Do
the radical leaders think that the masses of
the Republican party sympathize with them ?
Do they imagine how many of their old politi
cal associates exclaimed, when the result was
announced, 'God help the Old Common
wealth I " Terhaps they do not. It maybe
necessary that the votes of the State
of New York shall be counted to-mor-row,
before the fact of how positively they
have played into the hands of their opponents
becomes iully evident. Hat even m we warned
them before, so do we warn them again. Vir
ginia, rebellious and defiant, excited our anger
and called forth punishment from us; but
Virginia, loyal and submissive, has our hear
tiest sympathies. In no manner and form do
the people of the North regard the recent elec
tion in that State as a triumph of loyalty and
a defeat of treason. They see in it only the
degradation of a member of this Union, who,
from the establishment of our independence,
Las been endeared to us by a thousand glo
rious associations. The disgusting speotacle
of negroes voting like so many mechanical
beings; the keeping of polls open day after
day, and night after night, for the expressed
purpose of ensuring a radical success; the
election to office of such men as Ilunnicutt and
his gang of negro Constitution makers; the
antagonism of the two races as developed in
the solid manner in which they cast their
votes, and the rude and defiant conduct of the
blacks, exoite our earnest fears and sympa
thiesfears, because from all these things we
See another irrepressible conflict arising, and
sympathies, because the defeated party is com
posed solely of men of our own race aud of
the intelligence and civilization of the State.
What, then, must follow these radical ex
ultations at Virginia's degradation 1 The
question is easily answered. Ohio and Penn
sylvania will be repeated; the people will come
to the rescue of the country. False to the avowed
principles on which it triumphed last fall, the
Republican party has forfeited the confidence
of the people and must be removed from
power. The era of fanatical doctrines jand
Utopian theories is coming to an end; aud per
haps that it is nothing but poetic justice that
Virginia should give them the last blow.
Upon her soil was performed the tragedy
which placed the Republican party in power;
and it looks very much as if the conclusion of
the farce of this week will be followed by the
dropping of the curtain upon all that remains
of a once powerful organization.
Austria, aud Iba Concordat.
From the iV. Y. Herald.
fcoording to the Vienna correspondence of
the London Morning Herald, even Transylva
nia, that ultima Thule of the Austrian monar
chy, has sent up a petition to the Reichsrath
for Betting aside the concordat. This con
cordat, or treaty, was made by the See of Rome
With Austria in 1855, after Hungary hal been
crushed and Francis Joseph had revoked the
constitutional privileges which his uncle had
. been forced to concede. The provisions of the
concordat are now felt to be onerous, even by
the sluggish Austrian mind, which has been
Slowly awakening to a sense of its natural
rights ever since the battle of Sadowa dated
the period of transition through which Austria
is now passing from "a despotism that aimed at
supremacy over a vast variety of incongruous
and alien provinces by the agency of a great
army, a skilful bureaucracy, and, it must in
fairness be added, of a kind of hazy benevo
lence," to the experiment of constitutional
government. The Transylvanlan petition
against the concordat is characterized by a
primitive simplicity in the diction not gene
rally to be found In s-uch documents. lu
alluding to the imperfect state of the schools,
it says that "at the annual examinations the
best children are able to give an account of
how things looked in heave.n; they know the
names of the principal angels, the number of
the saints, and they know something about
hell and purgatory, and of the torments of the
damned. But how things looked in their own
laud, what it produce?, and what might be
produced letter and cheaper, what is exported,
etc., of all this they know nothing." Thus,
In Transylvania, as in other parts of the em
pire ami from ail parts similar petitions
Lave been presents Vo the Kiuparor-tliere
is a growing popular demand for somethiug
better and more iu couforwitv with the
actual poluical changes which are taking
place than the old doctrine and practice nr
'Talent whenever and whoever ecclesiastical
authority is supreme, aud predicts aur.hv
impiety, social and political ruiu fl9 thtt Z'
evitable consequence of any attempt to sub
vert or weakfu it. Of course the Utter vlw
' is taken by the majority of the clerical party
naturally jealous of innovation, and anxious
to maintain the privilege conferred upon the
hierarchy by the concordat. Tweuty-llve arch
bishops and bibhops have presented a petition
to the Emperor in favor of the concordat, as-
swting that either the rights of the clergy,
must be upheld or the principles or revolution
acdnowledged. On the school question they
gay: "It is not better instruction which is
wanted. What is desired is to attack religion
and morality. It is wished to make the school
Serve to propagate unbelief." Again they say:
"A3 to wlutf thiij miserable screaming against
the concordat betokens no one can any longer
doubt. It means we will have mar
riage without solidity and holiness, and
schools without religion and moral earnest
ness." The bishops tell hia Majesty the Kmpe
r or that "they consider it impossible that a
son of the exalted house which God has called
to govern Austria should ever so far forget
his mission, and the example of his ancestors,
as to turn the rights which are given him
against the Church of God." Happily, the
limperor in his reply showed that he had a
clearer and livelier sense of the changed condi
tion of things, aud of his own responsibilities
aud duties iu view of it, than his clerical ad
visers. He reminded them distinctly of the
fact which they had seemed to forget that he
is now "a constitutional prince as well as a
true son of the Church." The Iteichsrath has
shown that it Is likewise in unison with the
modern ppirit of progress by appealing to the
Pope to sanation such modifications of the
concordat as shall harmonize with the response
which it has itself made to the popular demand
for the repeal of the concordat. Now that
such a demand has become almost universal
in Austria, aud especially now that railway
enterprise is beginning to animate Hungary,
and bids fair to extend beyond its limits, it is
not extravagant to hope that even Austria will
at length lay aside every weight and run suc
cessfully the race that is set before her, as
well as before the other nations of modern
Kurope.
The Alllauc Between Prussia and Italy.
From the If. Y. Iribune.
During the past few days we have had seve
ral cable despatches announcing a serious
change in the diplomatic relations between
France and Italy. The Pari3 Monitcur has
officially declared that Louis Napoleon regards
the marching of Italian troops into the Papal
territory as a violation of the September Con
vention, and has on that account demanded
an explanation from the Italian Government.
The new Trime Minister of Italy, Menabrea,
charges, in turn, France with violating the
Convention, and, if the cable despatch in
our issue of Monday morning correctly repre
sents his views, expressly admits that the
movement of the Italian troops ha3 taken
place in consequence of the violation of the
treaty by France. Finally, a semi-official paper
of Perlin makes the important declaration that
Prussia will interfere in the Roman question,
should such action on her part be necessary
for preserving the peace of Europe. Thus,
supposing the cable not to have misrepresented
the meaning of these official and semi-official
utterances, we Lave declarations of a very
warlike character from each of the three courts
of Paris, Florence, and Berlin.
If, contrary to the indications which we
have been receiving during the past two
weeks, the Italian Government has made up
its mind to put itself at the head of the nation
and resist the demands of France, it has un
doubtedly received the strongest assurances of
help from Prussia. It was natural that both
Prussia and Italy, and especially the latter,
should proceed with the utmost caution and
reserve in the formation of an alliance against
France. An alliance against France is a much
more serious matter than an alliance against
Austria. Against Austria, the allied Govern
ments in 18iij felt no doubt as to the issue of
the war. The weak points of their enemy
were too well known, and neither Prussia nor
Italy stood in fear of future revenge on the
part of Austria.
France is a much more formidable opponent,
and is recognized as such by both Prussia and
Italy. In a single-handed war against France
Italy had reason to fear that bU would ha
crutiheul. Prussia, though aided by the forces
of South Germany, would at least have a diffi
cult stand. Both Governments would have
been grateful to Louis Napoleon had he al
lowed them to finish the work of national
unification without hindrance. But Napo
leon clings to the determination to preveut if
possible the annexation of Rome and
the entry of the South German States
into the North German Parliament.
His opposition to Italian unity he has just
again officially declared; his opposition
to German unity he has of late on several
occasions seemed to disown, in order to pre
vent, if possible, a Prusso-Italian alliance.
But Bismark, by his foreign policy, clearly
shows that he has never doubted that he can
complete the work of German unity only at
the risk of a French war. He has Ions: urged
Italy to strengthen her old alliance with
Prussia, and to concert . with Prussia the
simultaneous consummation of the national
unity of both countries. The history of the
past few months, though as yet but imper
fectly known, contains many indications of
the efforts ol Prussia ou behalf of a renewal
of the Prusso-Italiau alliauoe. Italy has
shown a natural fear to openly commit herself.
A few more days will reveal to what extent the
Italian Government is willing to cooperate
with Bismark.
The Roman Question,
From the JV. Y. World.
We are told in the latest cable despatches
that Garibaldi and his forces, from ten to
twelve thousand strong, are at and about the
village of Monte Rotoudo, within sight of Rome,
to which all the Papal troops had retired; that
the French troops having landed at Civita
Vecchia, had marched to and entered the Holy
City; that a detachment of the Italian army,
under command of General Cialdini, had
crossed the Roman frontier; and tlmt General
Menabrea, Prime Minister of Italy, justifies, in
a note, this movement, by saying that "the
violation, of the September treaty by the
French required it." It was previously ex
plained that the action of Garibaldi required it,
and that the Italian regulars were marching,
not to watch or threaten the French army,
but rather to cooperate with it in repelling
the "Libeiator's" advance. This note indi
cates on its face that Victor Emanuel may
yet lind an excuse for complying with the will
of the Italian people rather thau with the
terms of the September convention. All ad
vices from Italy go to prove that many eminent
conservatives have been stung by the arrogaut
demands of Napoleon, and induced by the pi e
vailing enthusiasm to consent that the
Roman question shall be settled, if possible,
now and forever, as tho people wish it to be
settled. There is no evidence that the first
intention of the Government to "put down"
Garibaldi meets with the approval of a minority
larB enough to be depended upon. The
feeling is very decided against another
r remh occupation of Rome ; and, weak as
taly is, the masses of the nation appear
.. iWiUlng t0 fl8M France forthwith if
Flweni!!0"'-' A reot,nl letter, from
Browth niS B. ionJou Times describes the
the throiia ? tue heir apparent to
Cialdini, which w Tin' bSg TZnJl Vo
operate against Garibaldi"? vofunteers
ltuiuorawen also current ta VwmJTiIS
the insurgents bad received direct material
aid from Prussia in the form of needle-gun
and other munitions of war. A cabl telegram
of Saturday announces what has been daily
expected, but what still needs confirmation,
that a crisis has been bronght about in the re
lations of France and Prussia, which miy
seriously affect the settlement of the question
now pending between Italy and the form-r
power.
The HufTrncetiucatloik Again The View
(of 'J Iiatlilcus tttveus Upou It.
from the K. Y. T met.
It is very evident that the radical leaders
intend to commit the Republican party to t'iu
new doctrine of national suH'rnge, and thus to
force it upon the country. The pretentions
pronnnciamento of Mr. Stevens, the bills and
speeches of Mr. Sumner, the passionate de
mands of Wendell Phillips, the ground taken
and the language used by the Tribune, the
Washington Chronicle, and other radical
organs, leave no room to doubt that Congress
will be called on to enact a law stripping the
States of all control over the suiTrage, aud de
claring who may and who may not vote in
every State of the Union. And, of course,
the first effort will be to force this upon the
Republican party, and compel every one who
desires to rank as a "good Republican," aud
to escape condemnation as a Copperhead aud
Rebel, to give it bis support.
The ground on which Mr. Stevens attempts
to base this movement i3 simply absurd. He
asserts that "the elective franchise ranks with
life and liberty in its sacred, inalienable char
acter" that the authors of the Declaration of
Independence so regarded it, aud that our
fathers "intended" to create a continental em
pire, based upon that principle. As a matter
of historical lact, this assertion is utterly un
true. There is not a particle of evidence to
show that the framers of our Government had
any such intentions, or held any such opin
ions. Every form of proof, everything they
did, wrote, and said, contradicts and refute3
this false assumption. Everything show3 that
the Declaration was not intended to lay the
foundation of any specifio government at all,
but only to set forth the principles on which
we denied the right of Great Britain to make
laws for the American Colonies. The
first Government formed after inde
pendence was achieved that of the
Confederation made not the slightest at
tempt to restrict the control of the
States over the question of suffrage. And
when that form was found defective, its defects
had nothing to do with the sull'rage they re
lated wholly to other questions; and in the
new Constitution, which was ordained to form
a "more perfect union," the control of the
suffrage was expressly confirmed to the Stales.
The qualifications for voting for natioual
officers were declared to be such as the .States
should prescribe for voting, for members of
the most numerous branch of their own Legis
latures. These acts, which were deliberate and
explicit, prove the intentions of the aotors to
have been precisely the opposite of those which
Mr. Stevens sees fit to ascribe to them. And
he cannot find in their words, in their writings,
or in their speeches, anything to give color of
warrant to his assertion that they "intended"
to do anything different from what they
actually did.
But Mr. Stevens' position is not only his
torically false, iU is intrinsically absurd. If
"the elective franchise ranks with life and
liberty in its sacred, inalienable character,"
as he says it does, then it must rank with
them also in its universality. Every human
being who has an inalienable right to "life
and liberty," must also have an inalienable
right to tio olootiva frjine.liise. No limitations
can be affixed in the one case which do not
belong to the other. Now life and liberty
belong, a3 "sacred, inalienable rights," to
women and children, as well as to men, to
aliens and "Indians not taxed," as well as to
citizens: would Mr. Stevens insist that the
elective franchise belongs to them, in the same
way and by the same title ? He would pro
bably say that a limit must be fixed some
where for the sake of good government; but
in so saving he surrenders the whole argu
ment. He concedes that the elective franchise
does not "rank with life and liberty in its
sacred, inalienable character," because that
can be limited and restricted from motives ot
expediency, while theyoannot. That may be
taken away from certain great classes of human
beings, at the mere will of the sovereign
political society while they cannot. That
may be denied to all the women aud all the
children more than four-fifths of all the
people, in any nation but who would dream
of denying "life and liberty" to either class If
Mr. Stevens' proposition, therefore, the ab
stract xrinciple on which he builds his scheme
of government, his new, reconstructed conti
nental empire, is not true. The elective fran
chise is not an inalienable right, belonging to
every human being. Aud if it is not that, it
is not an inalienable right belonging naturally
to any, for there can be no such thing ai natu
ral rights belonging to one class of human
beings that do not belong to all. The only
thing which makes them natural rights is the
fact that they do belong to all. 'The idea of a
sacred, inalienable, natural right belonging to
a man and not to a woman belonging to a
man the day after he i3 twenty-one, aud not
the day before is an absurdity. The elective
franchise is a political power, created by politi
cal society by the organized, established gov
ernment; as a light it exists only as the right
to exercise that power; and that right is con
ferred by the government which creates the
power.
When Mr. Stevens says, therefore, that this
sacred, inalienable right of voting, was "sus
pended," "bartered away for the time beiug,"
by the Constitution of the United States, he
talks nonsense. Never having existed as a
right, it could not, of course, have beeu bar
tered away. The framers of the Constitution
never dreamed of "suspending this as one of
the muuimeuts of liberty," partly, perhaps,
because a "suspended muniment" was some
thing never heard of in those early days, but
mainly because they did not recoguize'its ex
istence as a natural aud iualienable right.
What the framers of the Constitution actually
did was to designate the political authority by
which, under the form of government to be
thus established, the light of votiug should
be conferred.- And they decided that this
right should remain with the States. They
placed that decision, in clear, distinct,
aud unmistakable language, in the clauses
of the Constitution. Instead of "de
siring" to decide differently, no serious
proposition to do so was ever made. No oue
of the fathers of the republic ever eniertaincd
such a purpose, such a preference, or such a
wish as Mr. Stevens unhesitatingly ascribes
to them all to take from the States and give
to Congress control of the sull'rage question
throughout the Union. The assumption is
purely gratuitous. The argument, if a bald,
unsupported assertion can be oalled an argu
ment, is what we have already described it-,
purely a figment of .Mr. Stevens' imagination.
. Having tnu shown, as ho claims, that, "the
elective franchise," as one of the "inalienable
rights of man," was suspended by the arbitrary
Constitution of 17SV' Mr. Stevens next pro
ceeds to show tint this suspension "hM been
removed, so as to leave our hands unrestrained
iu restoring its full vigor," by the amend
ment adopted in l8Go". Here is what he says
on that point:
"The fourteenth amendment, now so linppllv
adopted, settles Hie whole qut'Ntlon, and pUoes
every American citizen ou u pei loot eqivillty of
rlithiH, bo far as merely national right and
questions nre concerned. It declared Mint nil
persons horn or mi t until zed in u10 I'ulted
tauten, and subject in the Jurisdiction thereof
are olli.enn of the United Htates, and of the
Htato wherein they renlde. No.state Ninll make
or enforce any law which ahull Rhridue Uio
privilege and Immunities of citizens of ttm
United .States; nor Klmll any person he depi Ived
of life, liberty, or property without due process
of lew; nor deny nny person wltnlu Its Jurisdic
tion tho equal protection of the law.
"If by the amended Constitution every
Aniellcan en l.en Is entitled to equal privileges
with evi ry nl Lor American cltl.eu; and li every
Anxrlcnn citizen In any one of the Htat.es
should he found entitled to Impartial Dutl'iaifo
with every other American olllz.'n lu nny
Kiate, thi n It follows as an inevitable conclu
sion that KuflrHgn throughout, this nation is
impartial nixl universal, ho funis eveiy human
beli'K. without regard, to raon or color, shall be
found concerned, uud so fur as it all'xets Hie
v hole nation.
"Can be who swears to support the Constitu
tion iu nil Its part refuse to aid in carrying
this Into effect without clear, direct perjury?
a worse pt-rjury than would have h 'en com
mitted by loose who, um'er t he old C institu
tion, cnld not B(jree to Mint Constitution, aud
tlniH refused their aitl to their fellow-meu.
"If every citizen of any State is en
titled to all the inalienable rights, privileges,
and Immunities of this Government, and if
one of those inalienable rights Is the right to
cast his ballot lor every man who is to take
part In the Government, show me the man who
Is so impudent us to deny that suirratce by the
ballot is due to every beiug wltnlu this realm
to whom Clod has given Immortality, lie must
bo an Impudent citizen, and ought never to
profess to believe in ttie existence of a Deity;
for t hat a world could be created aud governed
without an overruling cause is more feasible
than such a proposition."
We will not stop to examine Mr. Stevens'
notions of perjury, nor his ideas about the
Deity, or the "creation of a world without an
overruling cause." Both seem to be about as
muddled and confused as his notions of the
early history of our Government and his ideas
of natural right. But Mr. Stevens is by no
means the first and we have no right to sup
pose he will be the last of our publio men
who mistake words for ideas, and sounding
phrases about the objects and ends of govern
ment for sound and feasible measures of legis
lation. We cannot prevent him from im
posing upon himself by such tricks of rhe
toric; all we can hope to do is, by exposing
them, to prevent his imposing upon others.
The fourteenth amendment, which Mr,
Stevens quotes, has nothing whatever to do,
directly or indirectly, with the suffrage ques
tion. It relates wholly to the question of civil
rights. Its sole and exclusive object was to
secure an absolute equality of civil rights to
all people in the United States, without dis
tinction of race or color. A previous attempt
had been made to do this by law; but the con
stitutionality ,of such a law was denied in some
quarters and doubted in others; and to put
this matter beyond doubt, this amendment was
introduced, pressed, and passed through Con
gress and ratified by the requisite number of
States. Nobody in Congress pretended that it
had anything whatever to do with the suffrage
question. Nobody claimed or believed that it
conferred the right of voting upon anybody, or
that it affected in the slightest degree the
absolute control over that subject already
vested in the States. Mr. Stevens made no
such pretense. Mr. Wilson, of Iowa; Mr.
Jkmtwell, of Massachusetts; Mr. Williams, of
Pennsylvania all the leading radicals in the
House, indeed all the men of all parties either
expressly admitted or tacitly assented to the
admission that it did not touch the sull'rage,
or any other political right or franchise, in the
slightest degree. The claim which Mr. Stevens
ow brings forward is an after-thought. It is
a view never berore taKen iy mm or hy hut
one else. It is just as pure and groundless an
invention as his assertion about the fathers of
the republic.
The language of the amendment vindicates
fully this view of its meaning. It relates
wholly to civil rights to an equality of rights
before the law. It prohibits a State from
making laws which shall "abridge the privi
leges and immunities" belonging to citizens,
as citizens of the United States. But the privi
lege of voting is not among them. That is con
ferred, according to the Constitution, by the
authority of the States alone.
The argument of Mr. Stevens on this point
is this: (1) Every American citizen is en
titled to equal privileges with every other
American citizen; (2) In some one State every
American citizen may be entitled to the
privilege of voting; (3) Cousequently every
citizen must be entitled to the same privilgea
in every State. "It follows," he says, "as an
inevitable conclusion, that suffrage throughout
this nation is impartial and universal." Mr.
Stevens certainly has very queer notions of
an "inevitable conclusion." Suppose an Ame
rican citizen should be found in some one State
to have the privilege of establishing a bank,
or making a railroad; by the fourteenth Con
stitutional amendment every American citizen
is entitled to equal privileges with every other
American citizen, and no State can make any
law which shail abridge the privileges and im
munities of citizens of the United States; why
does it not "follow," according to Mr. Stevens'
logic, "as an inevitable conclusion," that
every American citizen has a right tosta
blish a bank or a railroad in every State f
Mr. Stevens is himself apparently not quite
satisfied with this argument. Perhaps he re
members that it was precisely the argument
by which, in the olden time, slaveholders in
the South sought to establish their right to
hold slaves in all the States and all the Terri
tories of the Union. At any rate, he falls back
upon another one a little more extraordinary
than this one:
"If every cltixen of any Htste," he says, in
the pH"-Pus;e quoted above, "ij entitled to ul! the
li.hllenah;e lights, privileges, and liil'D'Uuties
of this (iovernmeut, aud if one ol t ioe iti:.
lienuble lights I the riht to cast, his ballot tor
eeryuiuu who in to take pari in the ti iverq.
ment, show me (he man who is so iuipijciut u.
tocieny tbut suflVue by the ballot is dim io
every human bein within this ronlm to whom
Ciod hugfeivtiu liuoiortalUy."
That is, "if the right to vote is an inalien
able right, show mo the man impudent enough
to deny that it belongs to every human being
to whom Uod has given immortality." So we
say. If the one is true, the other must be
true also. Yet Mr. Stevens denies it. Wojaen
and children are "human beings," audit is
supposed that "Hod has given them immor
tality." He certainly has, if He has given it to
anybody. Yet Mr. Stevens will not permit
them to vote. We do not say that he is an
"impudent citizen," as he says of all who
agree with him in this inconsistency. We
only say that he Is a very foolish citizen that
he has no clear idea of what he is trying to say
he mixes up common sense and nonsetue
quite as badly as politics and theology. His
pretended argument is no argument at all. He
assumes the very point involved, and then, by
simply repeating it, considers it proved. If
the right to vote is an "inalieuable right," re
cognized as such by the amended Constitution,
then of course everybody has a right to vote.
But that happens not to be the fact. The "t"
in this case involves the whole question, and
Mr. Stevens must first get that out of the way,
he hope to prove anything at all.
a n r b ism Et.r m m a t
THE LARGEST AND LET STOCK OF
FINE OLD RYE WHISKIES
IN THE LAND IS NOW POSSESSED BY
HENRY S. II ANN IS & CO,,
Nos. 218 and 220 OUT II I ROUT STREET,
WHO Ol t'EliTllE SAME TO THE TRARK IH LOTft ON VERT AOVANTAUrof
TKB9I.
hlr Stoat of Itya WhiikUi, IH BOHD, nmprliti all tha favorlt krii
xtant, and run through tr various moatba of 1N05,'00, ad of thli yar, up ta
CARPETINGS,
OIL CLOTHS AND DUUGGEJT8.
HEEVE L.
S 12 tliBlu2m
The suffrage question is to beoome a subject
of political contest. Up to the present time
the States have had control of it. The Consti
tution, in express language, gives it to them.
An effort is now being made to take it away
from them and confer it upon Congress. The
effort is right enough. Perhaps such a change
ought to be made. It is possible, certainly,
that the whole spirit and opinion of the people
have changod, and that they now prefer a Con
tinental Empire, such as Mr. Stevens describes
with a central power resting on universal
suffrage, and absolutely controlling it, as does
the Empire of France to-day to the national
Union, resting on suffrage regulated and con
trolled by the States composing it, which our
fathers framed. If they do if the country is
ready for the change and the people demand it
it not only may, but it must be made. But
thi3 must be done by the people themselves,
through an amendment to the Constitution, and
not by Congress, through the enactment of a
law. And this is the mode by which the Re
publican party must seek the change, if it
decide to seek it at all.
LOOKING- CLASSED
OF THB
BEST FRENCH PLATE,
In Every Stylo of Frames,
ON HAND OR MADE TO ORDER.
NEW ART GALLERY,
F. BOLAND & CO.,
11 1 2tu2p oi- AltClI Street.
3TEAIVI ENGINE PACKING.
Tlio modern and extremely popular packing, called
HlLLElt'N Ll'BKICAIIVK,
oa
SOAP-STONE rACHINU,
Hub already been adopted by ovor 20,000 locomotive
mid htntiuunry Kniiies. and la beyond qnetttlon the
eiwietit bDDlied. the mum dni-ahi.. ti r immuui. nn,l
wtKrs the nibcblnery the leant of any Bteam engine
packing yet Introduced. It Is not liable to burn or
cut, does not require oil, and there In no waste In the
ii in umue in nu Hixe. to sun me boxen, rrora
to 2 Inches lu diameter. All nemmm luiunauiui i..
the line ol the ateam engine are particularly reuueated
to give this packing a trial. A liberal diacouutwlll
9f. C.NAnLEB,
KO. Cao ARCH STKELT, 1'IIILA.
Hole Agent for Pennsylvania and Delaware,
Kee certillcule below.
OnlfU K OFTHKfitTPKKINTFNDKNTOF MOTIVR 1
I'OWtK AXJ JlAlllIKUIV, tunc Kailwa y, y
JIV TlKAB SlK: In rei) vlo vnnr liM,lrlJ I.. ...i
tlon to the comparative economv of i..n u,.n..
as compared with Lubricating racking, I will say
tiiat Hemp l'acklng, at an average cost orS3 cents tier
pound, cents us na m mills per nille run, while the
i,uuricaung i-acKing costs, ut an aversge cost of
n. .at-riiw inr uuuuu. i i-iu uiiu per miio run. We
iirnpoBu to use It exclusively for all Bleuui bluOlug
Joxes. Very truly yours.
XI. U. 1UIOUU.B. isupt. M. P. it AL.
P. 8. The popular
Jll imAt LlC PACKINU,
Adapted to cold-water pumps, and made similar to
inn .uuriiaiivH r-ucKing, but ol UiUerent material,
will be lunilHhed promptly any size irora i to 2
"u ni u iuuiiu a superior article lor pumps,
U 8lUthJJH2P M. C. H.
GROCERIES, t:TC,
pRESH FRUITS, 1807.
PEAC'IIEM, PEABM, PlKEAPPLl,
PLU91N, APBIl'OTS, CJIEHHIKN,
HLACKDrttRlCM, qiTINl'KM, F.Tt,
PUl HEUVEl) ANI FKKftll, IN CANS A
UUkM JABS,
Put up for our particular trade, aud for sale by the
dozen, or lu smaller quantities, by
MITCHELL & FLETCHER,
tlO'am KO. laot C11KWNUT KTBEtlt.
JAMES R. W E D D,
TEA DEALER AND GROCER,
S. E. COK. EltillTII AND WAtXl'T HT.
Extra Flno Souchong, or English Breakfast Teal.
Superior Chilian Tcaj, very cheap.
Oolong Teas of every grade.
Young Hjbou Teas of finest qualities.
All fresh Imported. 8 Hl
EW BUCKWHEAT FLOUR,
wiiit clover uo.se y,
nust or sue keamon.
ALLKBT V. UOi:T,
Dealer lu Fine Groceries,
11 7(4 Corner ELEVENTH and VISE Bis,
KNIGHT & BON,
no. sot in: i UT ntiii:et.
FIRE AND BURGLAR PROOFSAFE3
TIRE I FIRE I FIRE I
AND BURGLARY ALSO J
THE GREAT SAFE TESTS
To be made positively on WEDNESDAY, thetthof
November next, on the vacant property at the North
east corner of TWENTY El.IUJT and ARCH Streets,
LILLIE'B CHILLED IRON SAFEd to be tested
with EVANS & WATSON'S, having the Boston
Steam Patent Attachment as a Fire-Proof, and with
BDy and all COMPETITORS AS A BURGLAR
PROOF both tests to be made at the same time and
placo, and to commence at 8 o'clock A M., the
weather permitting; If not, the first fair day there
after. No effort will be spared to make the above testa aa
strong and as thorough ai can be desired; and I trust
that all partita Interested will aim to be present, and
see that the tests are both thorough and fair, and be
able to Judge as to the merits of the Safes so tested,
the lmportai.ee of which will readily be conceded.
M. C. SADLER, Agent,
No. 039 ARCH Street.
P. S. It has become necessary to extend the time
tor the above test from the 22d Instant, as before an
nounced, for the reason that as yet I have had no
response from other sale-makers as to the furnishing
of burglar-proof safes; and as it Is very desirable to
huve the tests comparative, the extra time ts required,
to provide other safes tor the burglar proof test.
I notice the published acceptance of Evans & Wat
son, with conditions about as long as the moral law
code, some ot which I cannot entertain; but from
their very great desire to "promote the publio Inte
rest; their high consideration tor tlie tource. and their
enUreindisponUion to Injure the Iuin4ot any man,"
as therein mauliested, I presume ther will waive the
extra condltloLs, and furnish their safe. It titer do
not, the safo will be furnished for the test by other
Partlfs. At. C. 8.,
10 21 22 2 8 28 31-112 4 5 Agent.
CHALLENGE ACCEPTED
EVAKS & WATSON'S SAFE,
WITH SANBORN'S PATENT STEAM IM
rilOVEMENT, TV 11.1. IIE ON THE OROUJTD.
Mr. M. C. Sadler, Agent ot LMlle's Safes In this city,
did publish In the "PreHs" aud other newspapen a
challenge to Evans and Watson, bettrtug dale Sepleiu
uer K. 1S67, lu ilie following words, to wli:
'Now. therefore, be it known that I, M. C.Sadler,
or the city of Philadelphia, do oflar and propose to
burn one ol L ilie s Chilled Iron Safes, with one of
??ky,l,00.',i having the Boston fixture at
i ;.libM,Vf,"ie8Hme "I M burned on the
J-air (.rounds, Llllie's bale to be made with Bix-lucli
compohltion walls, on tne principles he makes Halt s,
ana the Evans A Watson Sale to be six-inoh oomposll
lion wails, liicludlng the Boston attachment, and on
the principle ot their usual make.
"The Sale to be burned at some convenient place In
the city of Philadelphia on the 22d of October next.
eather lair, or the lirst lair day thereafter.
"Evans fc Watson are hereby notified that they
can irake and have ready the Safe by that time the
lfst they can make as above specified, and a disin
terested commutes shall be appointed equally by
each parly, and In the usual way.
"Should Evans A Watson not respond in a reason
able time, then their Safe will be furnished by other
pariles."
Evans & Watson accepted said challenge October
1, 1M7, and. agreeably with lis terms, were on the lot
1 1 ground at Twenty-tlrst and Arch streets, at the
lin e mentioned (October 2.), with their committee,
with plenty or cord-wood, and with one of their Safes
containing the Steam Improvement, but neither Mr.
t-adler nor the Lillle bale making their appearance,
the committee retired, Evans it Watsou, however,
remaining ou the ground during the whole day.
We are sustained by uublln opinion when we atnert
that, as the challenging party.no authority rested
with Mr. Sadler to chauge the time, aud, by bis non
appearance, he has forfeited all right to further trials
under said challenge; but as we are willing and ready
at all times lo go into a trUl of hates, when fairly
conducted, witu Mr. Sudier or any other parties, we
hereby Inlorm our Iriends, the public, and Mr. Sadler,
that we will be "on the lot of ground at Toney and
Twenty-first s' reels, between Arch and Cherry streets,
ou the (lib of November next," with a committee or
three disinterested geutleuien, and with one of our
Nafes containing Sanborn's Patent Sleaiu Improve
ment, lu accordance with said challenge.
We desire our friends and the public to be On the
(.round punctually at 8 o'clock A. M., and see lor
themselves that the trial Is fairly made.
liiVANS & WATNON.
No. M 8. SEVENTH Street,
Philadelphia, Nov. 1, 1867. H2 3t
C. L. MAISER.
If ANUYACTUBKB O
f I 11 E AMD BTJBULABPBoOf
8AFK8,
LOrKttJVflTlT, UEI.L-UANEB,All
DEAUH JIM ASIIX.11N II A ItUWABB.
KO. 484 BAfcE WTBKKT.
jprrt A LAKGE ASSORTMENT OF FIEE
fJi and Burglar-proof SAFES on hand, with Inside
doors, Dwelhug-house Safes, free from damnum!
Prices low. C UAKNKM (OKlKt.
No. m VINE Street.
JOHN CRUMP,
OAIt PK NTEU AND I217II.Tiw.vri
BOPIl MO. SIS LODGE NTKKVT, AMD
IMtIL4DlCI.Ptri
QEORGC PLOWMAN,
OAIIPLNTEUAND BUILDEK
1U3MOVED'
To No. la.jL DOCK Htroot,
plUVI WRLL8OWNKItS OF JPUOPErlTV
JL '1 be only niace to am Vriw vi'.u. . .
diblulecled at vmy low prue.. w"uuu aua
a. peyson;
610, OOTSMIT,Y'ri'xiLLrLiBRA,u''v'3U