The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1871-02-02
Anaeyson gntelllgenttr,
Gen. Frank Blair Explains the Celebrated
isroadhead Letter.

ate. on the 18th of January, Gen. Frank Blair
addressed the members Of the Missouri Legls-
Iature, and in the course of his speech, offered
an explanation of the celebrated Broadhead
letter, which created such excitement IN the
Presidential campaign of 1868. 1t will be re-
membered that the declarations OF Gen. Blair
in that letter went so far as to pronounce not
OILY the reconstruction acts unconstitutional,
but that he would refuse to execute them If he
welded the power of the Executive. AS a
part OF. the history of this memorable declara'
ton. the speech of Gen. Blair will prove inter
estinp. and its utterance do not lose interest
from the fact that this distinguished gentleman
now occupies a seat in the United States SEN
ate
Much was said in the debate previous to the
election of letter addressed by me to dis
tinguished citizen of this State in 1868. de-
sire, now that this election has been consum--
mated, to speak few words in explanation and
by,wayo allaying the apprehensions expressed
by SOME gentlemen upon this floor. That let
ter and its language is to be interpreted by the
circumstances attending its writing. At that
time the reconstruction acts, so-called--some of
them had been passed and were in process of
execution-they were laws of Congress. The
PRINCIPLES upon which those acts hinged had
been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme
Court of the United STATES. The act by which
large numbers of the people of the South had
been deprived of the suffrage was declared un-
oonstitutionalina in accelerated case which wentup
from this State-that of Cummings against the
State of Missouri. 1t was there in that decis-
ion of the Supreme Court declared to be er
post facto and an attainder, and for that reason
Unconstitutional The other principle which
supported those acts, and upon which they
rested for their vitality, was. the power con-
ferred upon the military arm to try and to ex-
ecute prisoners who had been condemned by a
military commission in time of ptace-that
was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme
Court of the United States in the case of Null
ligan and Bowles. Previous to the time that
this letter was written there was under consid-
Grafton by the Supreme Court the McArdle
Casa case arising under the reconstruction
acts-where civilian had been arrested and
tried by the military commission of Vicksburg
That case was taken up. by habeas corpus to
the Supreme Court of the United States and
the judges unanimously, subsequent to the
writing Of the letter spoken OF, declared that
such conviction was unconstitutional. Subse-
ouent to this there was the case of Yerger for
the murder of Col. Crane. He was tried be-
fore 81 military commission in Jackson, Missis-
sippi, convicted and condemned to die. His
body was taken by habeas corpus from the mil
itary authorities and their decsion-thc death
warrant-was set aside and the case was turn
cd over to the authorities of the State of Mis-
sissippi, to be dealt with according to the law
and the Constitution of the United States. l
held in this letter that those laws being uncon-
stitutional, and so declared by the Supreme
Court of the United States, that the President
conld not, without violation of his oath, exc
cute those laws; and that if had been placed
in that position never would have executed
any unconstitutional law-so declared by the
Supreme Court OF the United States 1t would
have been perjury upon his part to have done
it; it would have been violation OF his oath
of Office to maintain the Constitution. 1t was
his sworn duty to set aside these acts, vaunted
by gentlemen upon this floor as being acts of
After the decision of the Supreme Court he
could have had no other alternative
But these reconstruction acts have been put
into execution. The President of the United
States, who is now in the executive chair, is not
called on to execute them or to set them aside
either, because their execution has been COM
pleted. But say again, as said in place up
on this. floor, that the use. of the military arm
calling soldiers from every quarter of the
country to o-wherever may be an election about
TO be held-whether it be in the city of New
York or the city of New Orleans, or in Texas
or Alabama, or Georgia, or South Carolina
wherever these elections recur you may we'll
predict that there the troops of the United
States will be carried to maintain in power per-
SONS placed there under unconstitutional acts
by the unconstitutional use of the military force
Of the country. And I say now, as ! said in
my seat upon this floor before received the
votes of the honorable gentlemen who have
made ne their Senator-I,say now that l will
never give my assent as long as am Senator
of yours or in any position in life in which
may bel will never give my assent to the use
well-behaved people of this country in tEeir
elections.
I thought twas due to you that should
make this brie: explanation of that which
seemed to be the cause of some alarm among
those who opposed nay election, who denounced
that letter as revolutionary. The reconstruc-
ton acts were revolutionary. The reconstruc-
ton acts subverted the Constitution, and as l
have predicted, and as many older and wiser
men than myself have predicted, the use of
military force, covered over with the pretext
that the people of the South were still in re-
hellion; that the use of military force which
had been employed so successfully to maintain
the Radicals in power in the Southern States
would, under that precedent, be carried else
where in our country, and if my liberal friends
were so much horrified-and justly So at the
improper interference on The part of the Ex-
ecutive of the government of the United States
in the elections in Missouri if they were in
dignant thar he should write that letter advis-
ing his friends to take certain course, and use
his,power by depriving certain officials of Office
in this State-if that was calculated to call
forth the Indignation of all right-mindcd men
in the State OF Missouri, i ask you what
was the justification, how much greater
the outrage of carrying to the City Of New
York and to the City of Philadelphia armed
troops to overawe the people in their elections
last November. Is there any comparison in
the outrage? Was there any Justification for it :?
N was an act to enforce the fifteenth amend.