The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1874-01-08

49,
motion to recommit, but he certainly
should not apologize 10 the gentleman
from New York. If the debate was fruit.
less it was due 10 Mr.. Woods political as.
sociates, who occupied most OF the time.
and the gentleman did not pay very high,
| compliment to his associates. He and MI.
stephens OF Georgia must settle the ques-
tlon, OF fruitlessness between them. His
apology to the House was, that by recon-
hitting he would save numerous roll-calls
on amendments, for when the bill was
again reported he would call for vote
without allowing further debate. He
would not go now into the legal question,
for that was exhausted yesterday by Mr..
Elliott, with grasp Of mind which showed
that he was the peer OF any man upon this
floor. AS to the matter OF social equality,
| if gentlemen did not now understand that
there was no social equality in the bill,
then the debate had been fruitless indeed.
Mr.. Elliott Is. CO. closed his speech on
the Civil Rights bill. The bill, he said,
simply proposed to enforce the written
guarantees Of the constitution. There
never was bill that was more clearly
within the constitutional power of the
government. He held that the war and
reconstruction Of the country had settled
the political status of the colored race,
| and the passage Of this bill would settle
their civil status and place the capstone on
| the temple of liberty founded on this con-
tinent by those who had gone before us.
Referring to the story of Boaz and Ruth. he
said that for over two centuries his people
had CLEANED in the field of their kinsmen.
and when, like Ruth, they found favor in
their eyes, they would be most grateful.
and would repeat the prayer of Ruth !:
"Entreat me not TO leave thee or to return
from following after thee, for .whitherso-
ever thou goest l will 60, and where thou
lodgest | will dye !; thy people shall be
my people, and thy God shall be my God.
Where thou diest | will die, and there will
be buried" Loud and prolonged ap-
plause on the floor and in the galleries. I
MIR. Blount (Ga.) argued against the bill
as being an unconstitutional measure, but
his experience in this house has taught him
that it was not of much avail to argue the
bill from constitutional standpoint. "a
MIR. Lawrence (Obio) said that after the
splendid and unanswerable argument of
Mr.. Elliott he felt reluctant to speak, but
he thought there were some constitutional
| questions which had not yet been suffi.
GENTLY alluded to. He thought that the
power was found in the Fourteenth amend
ment, which directed that protection should
be afforded to all citizens. This clause, he
commended, should be construed in its most
enlarged sense.
Mr.. Monroe (Ohio) argued in favor OF
the bill, on the ground that the greatest
strength and power of any government
was to be found IN spirit Of confidence
and good will of one citizen toward another
and this bill was necessary to secure the
good will Of large class Of fellow.citizens
by protecting them in their rights.
Mr.. Bright (Tenn.) said he believed the
bill was unconstitutional. inexpedient in
Judicious and unnecessary, and only fraueht
with evil to the race it was proposed to
benefit is
Mr.. Walls (Fla) argued that there was
reason for the enforcement of legislation
under the Fourteenth amendment, because
the negro race was not vet secured in all its
rights. The idea that the bill would affect
the white race was, in his opinion, all clap
trap, and in very brief period after the
bill was passed all this prejudice would die
out. lie referred to the message of Cover
nor Kemper, and argued that that message
itself was a reason why the bill should
pass. ~
Mr.. Herndon Texas argued against the
constitutionality of the bill, and contended
that the federal government was govern-
ment of limited powers, and it could not
overthrow the right of local self-goyern-
ment in the states.
Mr.. Purman (Fla.) addressed the House
in favor of the bill, and advocated it as a
matter of justice to the colored race.
MIR. Stowell (Va.) next spoke in adyoca-
cy Of the measure, referring particularly
to the action Of the Virginia Legislature
on Monday in protesting against the pas
sage Of the bill, which action he greatly
deprecated, and argued that it was an indi-
cation of a determination not to give rights
to the colored people.
Mr.. Buckner MOI argued that whatever
might be the nominal object Of the bill, the
effect could not in the Southern states be
otherwise than destructive to the best in
terests Of society, and result in the destruc-
ton of their school systems. This bill did
not propose to confer civil rights, but SO.
cial rights, and it was calculated to break
up many of the social systems Of the states.
he also denied the constitutional author
ity OF Congress over the question.
Without taking action on the Civil Rights
bill, the House. at o. M. adjourned.
Civil Service Conundrums Answered.
At recent civil service Examination |