The union Democrat., 1871-07-08


stitutional amendments brings into q holder
relief before the people those practical ques-
tions, of immediate interest to the country,
which have heretofore been oyershadowed
and eclipsed by the strife over the amend
ments. These practical questions are suf6-
GENTLY indicated in the several State Demo-
cratic platforms recently adopted, demand
ing: l. The abolition ofprotective tariffs. 2.
The preservation of the public lands for act
ual settlers. 3. A reduction of taxes. 4.
The payment of the national debt in lawful
national currency. 5. A genuine reforma-
ton of the civil service. 3. A rebuke Of
Executive interference 10 the domestic affairs
of the States. 7. Universal amnesty. All
these are points of difference between the two
great parties; for though many intelligent
and liberal minded Republicans agree with
the Democrats in demanding amnesty and
the abolition of protective tariffs, the Repub-
lican party refuses both, and must be held
responsible for high tariffs and prescription.
The contest will have much to do with these
questions, for they. are of deep concern to the
people. and have been too long kept in the
back ground by the party in powers
But the withdrawal of opposition to the
amendments does not leave the struggle of
1872 without a great constitutional element.
The Ku-Kluk bill, giving the President au-
thority to declare rebellion, and to suspend
the great writ of personal liberty whenever
and wherever he may wish to, remains on
the statute book living law. 1t is true the
President has not made use Of it; but that
only proves that there was never a necessity
for it, and that Radical Congress is addicted
to the habit of flippantly arming the Execu-
tive with dangerous weapons which it has no
right to put into his hands, and which he
has no honest use for. Alongside this bill
stand two Congressional election laws, which,
under the guise of protecting the purity of
Congressional and Presidential elections,
give to the Federal Government power to
control registration and elections IN the
States, and thus occupy domain hitherto
reserved to the States themselves. These
laws, which are not exceptional in their
character, but apply to all the States, the
Northern as well as the Southern, assert sub
stantially the strange doctrine that the States
have, in fact, no rights which the National
Government may not infringe that all their
rights and franchises are held at the suffer
ance of Congress that the Central Govern
ment may, under the pretext of enforcing the
Fifteenth, or some other amendment, invade
the States with us officials, usurp their au-
thority and perform their functions and that
for all these usurpations there is no redress,
since the central power that commits them
may defy the processes of even United States
Courts, and pack the benches Of the supreme
tribunal for the purpose Of debating its de-
cisions. The constitutional question before
the people, then, is not whether State hes a
right to secede or to nullify an Act of Con
gress-that was decided, in fact, by the late
Int rbothor Sfota hoe ony ri0htC
which the National Government may not al
| its pleasure set aside. When a central Gov.
eminent begins to appropriate the powers Of
surrounding States or provinces, it never, OF
it's own accord, ceases from the process. II
continues the encroachment, if unresisted,
until it has become unparalleled and the
States reduced to outlying dependencies.
What the Republican party has done once il
will not hesitate to do q second and third
time. If it temporarily surrendered all the
rights of the States to the Executive in the
Ku.Klux bill, at time when there was nc
necessity for the extraordinary sacrifice, il
will assuredly repeat the act again and again,
| till the central Government will claim the
surrendered liberties as its own property,
and the despoiled States will be helpless to
regain them. sit is the tendency of the Ku-
Klux bill, says the Chicago Tribune, .rath-
er than the bill itself, or the execution of it,
which gives force to the assaults of the Dem.
ocracy. This tendency is towards the obi.
teration OF States and the Capitalization of all
powers at Washington, after the French
model of government" 1t mentions the
Congressional election law as "another of the
signs of this tendency" and intimates that
the transformation which this legislation fore.
shadows will never receive the sanction oil
the people.
The Democracy have ever opposed, and
still oppose, this absorption of local State
rights by the central Government, and deny
the lawful authority of Congress to surrender
the local liberties to the central power while
the Republican party substantially claim for
the Government at Washington unlimited
authority to do whatever it may wish to do,
in defiance of constitutional prohibitions, and
in spite of the remonstrances of the States.
Which of those hostile views is hereafter to
prevail in our national legislation, is ques-
ton that must enter into the next Presiden
tial controversy it has a legitimate place in
that contest, and cannot rightfully be ig
nored.-!S. Louis Republican.