The Nigger in the New Constitution.
Great is the nigger, great is modern Democracy, one and inseparable, now and forever! Wherever Democracy — modern Democracy — finds it way, there the nigger is sure to be heard from. No matter where, in the Constitutional Convention, Congress, or the rebel army, modern Democracy must amuse itself with the nigger, somewhat after the fashion of a boy with a pin amusing himself with a fly. Democracy professes to hate the nigger, and yet it can't live without him. All that it is and has been for the last ten or twelve years, it owes to the "colored population." It has electioneered on this principle: "I hate niggers; not if you don't vote for me you love niggers." Or, in this wise, "I hate snakes; now if you don't vote for me you love snakes!" We do not which to be understood as making a comparison between niggers and snakes, but we are trying to illustrate how a Democrat tries to make the nigger subserve his interests. The truth is, the nigger is an unpopular institution in the free States. Even those who are unwilling to rob them of all the rights of humanity, and are willing to let them have a spot on earth on which to live and to labor and to enjoy the fruits of their own toil, do not care to be brought into close contact with them. Democracy is aware of this fact, and seeks to stride into power over the prostrate form of the despised and friendless negro. Mighty mean principle this, to be sure, but it is Democratic. Now we confess that we have, in common with nineteen-twentieths of our people, a prejudice against the nigger, but we do not hold that on that account we are bound to vote the Democratic ticket, nor spend three or four hours of each day of our life in devising schemes to rob the black man of all the rights of human nature, and herein we differ from modern Democracy. In the Constitutional Convention, which is now about to wink out like a tallow candle in the full blaze of day, the nigger has acted a conspicuous part. This is not a matter of surprise. Had the convention failed to lug in the nigger, and mix him up with its proceedings, the world would have had serious doubts of the soundess of the Democracy of those composing the majority. But the majority were careful to remove all cause for doubts on this point. Judging from the form of the poll book, about one-half of the labor of the Convention has been bestowed upon niggers, half-niggers and quadroons. The people are to vote for or against section first of article entitled "Negroes and Mulattoes!" — for or against section two of article entitled "Negroes and Mulattoes," and for or against section three of article entitled "Negroes and Mulatoes!" Goodness! "Niggers and Mulattoes!" "Niggers and Mulattoes!!" "Niggers and Mulattoes!!!" The charmed number of three times we are to vote for or against "Niggers and Mulattoes!" Blessed privilege! The majority over at the State House are half crazy on this nigger question. We verily believe that if one of them were asked by a religious teacher, "What was the cause that followed Adam's transgress?" he would promptly answer: "Niggers and Mulattoes!" and if questioned by one of the people as to "what is Democracy?" he would as promptly reply, "Niggers and Mulattoes!" — and then we should think he was not so very crazy after all!