The weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 186?-1869, 1868-08-19

bance or present any chance OF O civil war, BUR-
on the contrary prevents every thing Of the kind
the whole bill. Y
The system proposed In this bill is no new
thing; there was not single civilized govern
ment in the world but had a military force OF
hand to assist the civil arm where such assist
ance was necessary. 1t was always necessary to
have military force at command to preserve Or
der and protect the peace Of the community, and
that was all the bill proposed to do.
As to the charge of unconstitutlonality there
was not the slightest foundation for 1t. The
reason why so small force was provided, was
that II would cost too much to arm and equip
the whole militia force of the State as provided
for by the Constitution, and 1t was to save ex-
pense to the people that the present bill was In
trodnced. Tie bill only provided for the calling
out OF the militia in cases Of emergency, and II
was SO just and fair that he could not possibly
see how any one could object TO II eKcept for
pEty purposes; The Republican party v,s
would be caused by any member Of that party.
but knew they would exercise the right Of elec'
tive franchise quietly and peacefully. It was
simply absurd to talk about 0verturnlng the laws
and governments framed by Congress. You can
not take away the elective franchise from free
peole without civil war, and woe betide any
party that should attempt It. What measure for
the good of the people have the opposition once
proposed from the surrender Of Lee down to the
present time, None. On the contrary they have
opposed every measure that has been proposed.
| II they were opposed to bills introduced whv not
furnish something better to take their placer
| If they are SO desirous OF union and harmony,
| why do they not do all they can to help pass 1t
| instead of to defeat it! The colorcd people are
| not foolish enough to vote for the Democrats.
| Can coored people ever think Of voting for those
| who would again reduce them to slavery No,
sir, never !-they always did and always will vote
| with the Republican party. This bill does not
| give the Governor as muchpower as was
! given him BY the President in 1885, and
he challenged any one to say that that power
had ever been abused. II not abused, then why
| would he abuse any power with which he might
| be entrusted nowY At the present time wnen the
| Government was threatened no man but loyal
man should be entrusted with power 1t had
been announced BY tht Senator from Rowan that
If this bill was passed, the Republican party
| would surely be defeated. He was grateful to
the Senator for his kind interest in the Republic
can party, but he, as well as many others, had
heard of many false prophets, and he thought
the Senator from Kansas was one OF that kind.
Mr. Rich said, the long winded and determined
opposition to this bill reminded him OF couple Of
lines in Hudibras, and to this he would call the
especial attention of the Senator from Rowan,
Mr.. Robbins, viz: '''i ~
| "No rogue e'er felt the halter draw
With good opinion of the law" bs
The amendment was defeated.
Mr.. Osborne offered an amendment to section
Q, OF substitute bill, and explained the grounds
l upon which it was offered. I.
1 Nj. Lassitcr opposed the amendment.
Mr.. Osborne defended 1t.
Mr.. Moore Of Cartcrct moved the previous
| question on amendment. ID .t.ltT
YEAs-Messrs Barnes, Beeman, Love, ,Melchor,
Mason, Osborne, Purdie, Robbins, Wynne and
~Wison-10. .Ielus .aI'.
Burns, Blythe, Colgrove, Cook, Davis, Eppes,
Forkner, Galloway, Hayes, Harrington, Hyman,
Jones OF Wake, Legg, Lassiter, Long Martindale,
Moore, Of Carteret, Moore OF Yancey, Ricl, Rich.
ardson, Smith, Shoffner, Sweet, Welk Grand Win
stead-23. .I,- ft. .....-..s- III
The amendment was rejected.
Mr.. Osborne Offered an amendment to Sec
tion 5. ~, E, y. .I
Mr.. Rich held previous question to have been
called, and no further amendment In order.
The Chair decided the amendment In ORDER
Yeas-Mcssrs Barrow, Barnes, Beeman, Lind
say, Love, Mechor, Mason, Osborne, Purde,
Robbins, Shuffner, Wynne Winstead and Wilson
| IA, s...- ...
Nays-Messrs. Bellamy, ,Brogden, Burns, Blythe
Colgrove. Cook, Davis, Eppes, Forkner, Gallo
way, Hayes, Harrington, Hyman, Jones of Wake
Legg, Lassitcr, Long, Marlindale, Moore Of Car
teret, Moore of Yanccy, Richardson, Smith
Sweet and Welker-25
The amendment was rejected
Mr. Sh0tfner offered all amendment. Rejected
Some discussion here took place Us to proper
ruling in previous question:
Mr.. Osborne offered another amendment, ant
spoke in its favor Rejected. l tt
MIR. Robbins offered an amendment to IL, sec
tion %. Rejected. i-rlt
Mr. Sweet gave notice of motion concerning
transfer OF previous question, and asked i've min
utes suspension ofspecial order.
Mr. Moore, of Carteret, favored the motion.
Mr.. Love opposed it Granted.
Mr. Sweet moved that the call foe the previou III
question be transposed from Its prescnt position
in the list Of privileged motions, to the secont
position among said sections. 'iN
Mr.. Robbins hoped the motion would notpre
vail lou lEF1 t
Mr. Barrow moved to amend Mr.. Sweets mo
tion by continuing the disposition to the end o
the session Agreed to-
The motion and amendment were carried.
Mr. Colgrove moved the previous question
Carried. And the bill passed the House by 8
yeas to II nays.
Mr. Galloway moved reconsideration Of tn
vote.
Mr.. Cooke moved the motion be laid on th,
table. Carried
On motion of Mr. Colgrove the Senate I'd
journed. -1