The fact that the general sentiment of the country demanded that slavery should no longer exist within its boundaries, is a very significant one, when considered in connection with the tendencies and prophecies of the present; it shows that the capacity and desire for freedom is being rapidly developed in the human soul; it indicates that the mind begins to appreciate what freedom really guarantees to its votaries in its broadest signification; it begins to recognize the glorious truth that every soul will, sooner or later, demand and receive all its rights.
The demands of public sentiment, which have already resulted in modifications of the constitution of the country, will not stop at the door of African slavery, which it has thrown wide open; there are many other systems of slavery still left to be abolished; while they do not all enslave the body, they so fetter the soul and the mind, that their influence is even more pernicious and galling than the enslavement of the body.
The African slave, toiling under the burning sun in the cotton, rice and sugar plantations of the South, was virtually in possession of more freedom of soul than are many of the white race, even in our own midst. Look into these things, and see if, while you have “cast the mote out of your brother’s eye,” you have not a “beam” in your own; these, however numerous, will in turn and time demand of the people and of the government, when in its province, such attention as may be required to extend freedom in all directions where “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” legitimately lead.
The history of the past as well as the tendencies of the present prophecy with distinctness and positiveness that the demand will soon go out, not only for a government founded on equal rights to all, but whose laws shall be administered with justice and equity, guaranteeing freedom of body, mind and soul to every living intelligence.
From evidences rapidly accumulating, it is believed that this country is ripening for such a form and administration of government; but in the present condition of society and of servitude to its customs, the imperfect and partial manner of arriving at representation, and of making and administering law, such a reform cannot be inaugurated; that is to say, although such a reform would be acceptable to and welcomed by the country, and will soon be demanded by it, as yet it is impossible to organize an effort, strictly within itself, that could effect it, because there is not a sufficient concentration of understanding upon the requirements to be met, nor of wisdom enough to draft for these requirements adequate laws and forms of administration. Were such a code prepared and submitted to the people, do you think it would be rejected?
In the earlier days of the republic legislation seems to have been conducted upon constitutional principles; but in these latter days it has so far departed from its seeming mainsprings of action that it is safe to assert that legislation, founded strictly upon considerations of principles of justice and right, is unknown in the land. If sometimes a great principle is demonstrated through legislation, it will invariably be found upon strict investigation, that the legislation was not predicated upon the principle, but upon some personal or party benefit expected to flow therefrom; the principle, therefore, stands under obligation to the expected benefit, and to the party needing it, and will doubtless, in its impartial operations, remember them. While this condition is a perfectly legitimate one, flowing from adequate producing causes, there are individual minds and souls, by thousands, who rise in their capacities for government out of it, and demand reform and the essential truth of Principle.
Government may be compared to an individual who, having committed some infringement upon the law of justice, is impelled, by the position it forces him into, to continue the practice to sustain himself from falling; but as a system of injustice cannot be perpetual, fail he must, sooner or later; and the longer it is delayed, the more complete will be the wreck and ruin when it comes;—as with the individual, so it must be with the State. Once started upon a system of law-making and executing not founded upon principles of justice and right, the course must be pursued and sustained by further enactments, either to cover the deformities of the previous proceeding or hide its purposes, and unless righteous judgment come to the rescue before the course has led to wide-spread and apparent corruption throughout all its channels of administration, it must eventually culminate in the downfall of the government, if not in the destruction of the nation.
Policy, not principle, is the ruling power behind all present legislation. Policy, inevitably and indiscriminately, leads to corruption. Corruption, obeying the inherent laws of its own nature, untouched by and beyond the control of the enactments that first gave it life and afterward fostered its growth, must culminate in certain destruction to all parts involved, whether it be within the body human, the body corporate or the body politic.
Did the Republican party, as a party, desire the freedom of the negro simply and solely because it was one of his natural rights? Would freedom have been extended to him by that party had it been positively known that all his influence would be used against it? Or would the Democratic party, as a party, have opposed the enfranchisement of the negro had it been known that he would become its political ally?
Judging from the indices of the past, it is fair to suspect, at least, if not to conclude, that the Republican party is expecting another such exigency as existed when it was found politic to extend freedom and suffrage to the negro; and in the question of female suffrage, for which the demand is now being earnestly made, there is but little doubt that it sees another means of salvation in the future, and seeks to postpone the question until the exigency shall become more imminent and dangerous. It may be argued that the Republican party was organized upon the principles of freedom. If this were wholly true, it would be also true that it had no sooner become a party in power than it resolved itself into a tribunal to define the limits for the application of the very principles that had placed it in power; thereby endeavoring to prostitute the principle to subserviency to the policy of its leaders, instead of calmly and firmly following where it would legitimately lead; like all parties and sects, of previous origin, it built upon a principle, and then, instead of wisely following, recklessly attempted to guide it.