Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1871-04-21

ment may be effected this evening, though the
probability is that it will be tomorrow.

ment may be effected this evening, though the
probability is that it will be tomorrow.
NOTABLE FEATURE OF THE DEBATE.
The good temper with which the debate has
generally been conducted is quite noticeable.
With the exception of the Kentuckians there
has been scarcely any bitterness, and they were
undoubtedly excited by the powerful
portrayal of the condition of that state
Butler made in his recent speech
l doubt if the whole range of recon-
struction discussion exhibits anything like
the marked earnestness and vigor which has
animated both sides of this debate. l may over
estimate its Importance, but 1 cannot help be-
lieving that it will be regarded hereafter as, on
the whole, the most luminous and lucid EXPOSE
ton, pro and con, of constitutional powers,
limitations and interpretations ever had in an
American congress- The most vigorous argu-
mentation came from the republican ranks The
democrats have literally had nothing to present
but the old narrow states rights views, while
within our lines there has been distinct and
wholesome difference as to the limits of power
invested in the general government. Yet the
narrowest Interpretation made by republicans
WeuI DeNOuu llG INolliStlOuS IOllulSu up ny
the democrats. Judge Poland, Willard Blair,
even Amber of Ohio, whose motives seem
rather those Of an obstructive than
of a critic, claim the constitution, without
the amendments, conveys ample powers to the
executive for the protection of persons, rights
and property, when assailed by acts amounting
to insurrectionary efforts or causing seditious
mpediments to the enforcement of federal laws;
but they argue that the last three amendments
do not enlarge those powers, but only explain
and emphasize them. On the other hand it is
claimed by some of the ablest men in both
branches that this emphasis is really broaden
ing and increase of the powers and duties i'm
posed by the constitution for the protection OF
the citizen, his personal and political rights,
against state or local invasion or overthrow
thereof. On the whole the most moderate view
has triumphed. After listening closely to the
debate with strong marital tendency to the
more radical side, find myself quite well pleased
at the success Of the moderate view. 1t is strong
enough for me, in accepting the present bill.
KUKLUx LEADERSHIP.
There is another fact developed, which, in its
effect on the coming canvass, is of Importance.
refer TO the well-understood difference on the
| kuklux policy known to exist inside the demo-
cratic ranks. The advent of Frank P. Blair, Jr.,
is, believe, regarded by the shrewdest northern
democrats in congress as an unmiXed evil to
them and theirs. His bold and direct dema-
goguism troubles them. He dares say and de-
fend what they heartily believe now and will
| sustain when it seems safe for them to do so.
| Blair denounces both the amendments to the
constitution and the entire reconstruction policy.
The 14th and 18th amendments he declares
are fraudulent, while the reconstruction
acts are one and all unconstitutional,
and their results are to be overthrow
at the earliest opportunity. There are not want
ing southern unionists here who declare it their
conviction that Gen. Blair is himself a chief of
the widespread democratic organization, whose
armed bands are the southern kuklux. 1t is
certain that such democrats as 'Sunset" Cox are
disguised with Blair's rashness. The truth is,
| however, that the Missouri senator is bold and
| sagacious, and well understands that his are the
only issues on which it is possible to rally the
western and southern democracy. He strikes
high. Personally aiming for a presidential
| nomination, he is almost sure to dictate his
party's policy, even if he fails to become its
standard.bearer. The commercial democrats
don't like the prospect, and in the end there
will be bolt, though Of limited extent.
| OBSERVER