The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1869-12-22
xLIsT coNGnEss-aD SESSION.
WASHINGTON Dec, II 1869

talegraphie communication between
the United States and foreign coan-
tries.
Mr.. Sumner said that, since the
bill had been reported in February
last, cable had been landed on our
shores from France, and this render
ed modification of the bill neces'
sary. He proposed an amendment
to make the language of the bill ap'
plicable not only to future bnt exis-
ting cables.
Mr.. Thurman suggested a legal
question had been bToached to the
right of the State to premit landing
cable without permission of the
General Government, he therefore
moved to refer the bill to the Conn.,
mittee on judiciary.
Mr.. Sumner said the question re.
terred to by the Senator from Ohio,
that of States rights, was an old GUS
toner in the Senate, but-the author
ity of the General Government in
this matter was ample in the con-
stitution direction to Congress to
| regulate commerce with foreign ma
| tions.
Mr.. Thurman, referring to a re.
| mark by Mr.. Sumner, said that his
own remarks were for the purpose of
reviving the theory of States rights.
He did not understand the limit
which that Senator would impose on
Others in considering legal questions
in the Senate. That Senator seemed
to see, in his own suggestion, the ap-
partition of States rights, which, ap-
parently, excited, in his mind, some
thing of alarm 50 earnestly had the
Senator from Massachusetts been en-
gagged In putting down seme of the er.
| rOeous nOpeuing of said rights, that his
habit of mind made it impossible for
him to believe State had any rights
at all upon any theory of the Consti'
tuition. States had some rights, and
the speaker believed they could stIIl
be referred to in the senate. He had
not denied the exercise of National
authority under the pending bill, but
had simply asked that it should re.
ceiYe the consideration which il de
| served. He insisted upon his con-
| stitutional privilege to say this much
without improper criticism of his
| motives.
The morning hour having expired,
the Senate took up the bill to protect
the reconstruction of Georgia.
Mr.. Salisbury delivered an argu'
nent in illustration of the incon.
staucy of Congressional legislation
relative to the unreconstructedS States,
which he claimed was prompted
| from parts an motives and violation
| of the Constitution.
| Mr.. Stockton expressed the belief
that if the Fifteenth Amendment
was declared adopted through the
means contemplated, the day would
| come when it would be declared to
be no part of the Constitution. The
| people Of the United States would
never submit, if they could prevent
1t, TO attempt to force negro suffrage
upon them. The objection to it was
not so much to the exercise of suf'
frage by negroes as it was to the me-
thOd by which the accomplishment
of the object was designed. The
dominant party feeling that this Fif-
teenth Amendment must be adopted
now, or be lost forever, were willing
TO attain that end even though 1t
carried with 1t the destruction OF
every thing Of value in the relation
of States to the Union.
| Mr.. Morton said if the Senate re-
fused to make the same requiremets
for Georgia as insisted on in the
cases of Virginia, Texas and Mis-.
sissippi, it would be q confession that
in their action heretofore they had
/
in their policy it was too late for Con.
gressto think,of turningback by in
cooperating this provision in the bill
The effect would be to secure the rat
ifcation of the Fifteenth Amend.
ment. The purpose of ftheDemocratic
members Ofthe Ohio Legislature, and
the Democratic majority of the New
| York Legislature would be fOrestall'
ed, and seeing that the amendment
| was secured, they would be found
oa the strong side, instead of de.
nouncing the negro race they would
be found putting themselves in a
position, to be most acceptable to
American citizens of African descent.
1t was not here contemplated to
force any measure upon Georgia, but
simply to say to her, you do not
| give US the security we require, you
can remain where you are. Those
who had the upper hand in Georgia
never would adopt the Fifteenth
Amendment unless under compul.
sion, for they would be urged not to
go one step further than Congress re-
quired them to GO.
Mr.. Edmunds asked why the Sena'
tor from Indiana did not move to in
seTt in the bill a clause directing the
military commander in Georgia to
declare the amendment adopted
without the formality of vote on
the subject.
Mr.. Morton asked why did not the
Senator think of that when he voted
to impose the Fourteenth Amend
ment.
Mr.. Edmunds denied he had so
voted, but subsequently admitted
having voted for the reconstruction
measures, which contained the
measures referred to.
i Mr.. Sherman, in reply to his col
league, (Thurman) asserted that the
people of Ohio, at the ballot-hox, had
declared in favor of the Fourteenth
and Fifteenth Amendments and
that the merits of the questions pre-
sented by each were indorsed by the
people after a full discussion.
Mr.. Thurman reiterated his asser'
tiOns declaring that in the elections
referred to the grave issues involved
in the constitutional amendments
had received comparatively little at:
tentiOn in consequence of the more
exciting appeals to the people by
the Republican party in denuncia.
ton Of Andrew Johnson as a traitor
not to his country but to his party.
Mr.. Sherman said that, like the
acts ofCongress, the acrion of State
Legislatures might be a subject OF
repeal at any time. In repely to his
colleague, he claimed that the people
of Ohio never occgpied a doubtful
position on the apestion of the a.
doptIOn either OF the thirteenth,
fourteenth or fifteenth amendments.
If the simple question was to-day
left to the people of Ohio whether
they would disfranchise a man be-
cause he was born with black skin,
he believed the answer would be in
the negative by fltty thousand major
i ityand injustice to that State he
made this statement.
In the course of further debate be.
tween the Senators from Ohio, Thur
man replied at length to his. col
league, He said that under pretense
of sustaining previous reconstruction
measures, this bill struck down a
| State; that it was dangerous in .Prin'
ciple, for Congress could strike down
members of the Legislature of Geor.
gia because they were obnoxious
| politically. The. same power might
/ hereafter be exercised to strike down