To establish the Equal Rights of All, no further Amendment is needed.
Charles Sumner
The Public Record
Charles Sumner was an American lawyer and statesman who represented Massachusetts in the United States Senate from 1851 until his death in 1874. Before and during the American Civil War, he was a leading American advocate for the abolition of slavery, and after the war he was a key figure in the Reconstruction era, during which he and other Radical Republicans successfully fought to end slavery and ensure basic rights for Black Americans. He continued advocating for racial equality until his death, lobbying in his final days for a civil rights bill that served as a model for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Historians credit Sumner with coining the phrase "equality before the law," which he first used as part of an early attempt to integrate Boston's public school system.
gutenberg.org
Instead of adding new words, it will be enough, if you give those that exist the natural force belonging to them.
An illustrious magistrate once retorted upon an advocate, who, dissatisfied with a ruling of the court, threatened to burn his books, “Better read them”; and so would I say now to all who think the Constitution needs amendment, Better read…
Then again read it in that other light which, as from another sun, newly risen at midday, streams from the obligation of Congress to “enforce” the abolition of Slavery.
In whichever light you read it, you will find always the same irresistible meaning.
Even if the text were doubtful, the war makes it clear.
The victory which overthrew Slavery carried away all those glosses and constructions by which this wrong was originally fastened upon it.
The promises of the Fathers must be sacredly fulfilled.
This is a great victory of the war,--perhaps the greatest.
It is nothing less than the emancipation of the Constitution itself.
And here, after this long review, I am brought back to more general considerations, and end as I began, by showing the necessity of Enfranchisement for the sake of public security and public faith.
What I ask especially is impartial suffrage, which is, of course, embraced in universal suffrage.
For the present, I simply insist that all shall be equal before the law, so that in the enjoyment of this right there shall be no restriction not equally applicable to all.
And yet I have no hesitation in saying that universal suffrage is a universal right, subject only to such regulations as the safety of society may require.
No matter under what depression of poverty, in what depth of obscurity, or with what diversity of complexion a man has been born, he is nevertheless a citizen, the peer of every other citizen, and the ballot is his inalienable right.
The ballot is peacemaker; and is it not said, “Blessed are the peacemakers”?
Deny it, and the freedman will be the victim of perpetual warfare.
Grant it, and he is admitted to those equal rights which allow no sacrifice.
The ballot comes to him in his depression, and says, “Use me, and be elevated.” It comes to him in his passion, and says, “Use me, and do not fight.” It comes to him in his daily thoughts, filling him with the strength and glory of manhood.
Unquestionably the ballot promises this great boon, because it brings all into natural relations of justice, without which reconciliation is a vain thing.
Do you wish to see harmony truly prevail, so that industry, society, government, civilization may all prosper, and the Republic wear a crown of true greatness?
Reading and writing are of inestimable value, but the ballot teaches what these cannot teach.
Especially is it important to a race whose manhood has been denied.
The work of redemption cannot be complete, if the ballot is left in doubt.
The freedman already knows his friend by the unerring instinct of the heart.
Politicians like Charles Sumner
