National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-04-16

Il
| officers, should combine among themselves to
hold the people under their government,
and the people should be OF course resisting
that, and the government should apply to the
President to sustain 10, and the President
should interfere, and then the question should
be presented to US whether, after that thing
had continued for ten years, and they had
avowed their purpose OF Continuing for life, we
should have any power whatever to interferci
The particular case Is only put to test the
| Senator's argument of the distinction between
our guaranteeing republican government and
what he calls republican form Of government
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. ! think have answered.
that question. l say that we are bound to
carry out the guarantee of the Constitution.
\ IL the people ore so entirely unfit for . repub-
| licsn government. we must still give them gov
eminent, even II Il is O military commission.
But no such state Of things will exist. You
can suppose a condition of things which will
| prove that any government is inefficient and
unfit for the purposes for which 1t Is inauyu-
rated.
| Mr.. President, II the Federal Government
can, in the exercise of its arbitrary discretion
discretion from which there Is no appeal, and
10 which there is no review, not even by the
people, for we are not responsible to the people
Of Louisiana for the votes given here-if the
Federal Government can, in the exercise Of
this arbitrary power, set aside the election of
| Governors and Legislatures of the States, then
there is an end Of the independent government
of the States. / submit that the procedure
here contemplated is without precedent in the
General Government, and without analogy in
any of the State governments.
As matter of necessity, deliberatiye assem-
blies must be the judges of the qualifications
of their own members. We judge of the quail
| fcations of Senators, and the House of those of
Representatives. But further than this neces-
sity extends was It ever heard of that of an
election Of State officer, a Governor, State
treasurer, a comptroller, was set aside by
political body! An election is never set aside
even by the judiciary. 1t is submitted to dis
passionate and impartial tribunal of justice,
not to set aside an election, but to determine
whether the claimant was ever elected.
| Order new election in Louisiana, and you hnvo
established precedent that must impair cleo
| tive government. Excited parties enter upon o
| strongly contested election; the one party Is in
harmony with the dominant party in Congress,
lature;l that party seeks by violence and fraud
to obtain success, and when 1t fails comes to Con
pretense for covering their defeat and for having
the election set aside, and for having a second
trial with the adverse party who were successful
set aside No, sir better far let the States suffer
Tor their own misdeeds, even the innocent with
me guilty; their suffering will lead them to cure
vicious election, in the calm periods that inter-
yene between elections all parties will unite in
uofieAhB auu huOpIluS secure honest
elections Registry laws, poll-llsts proper places
penal statutes viii be adopted as the means Of pre-
adhere to tho Constitution, and do what 1t says,
which is that we shall guarantee to the several
states government, which we did with Louisiana
when We sent our troops there, preserving order
and tranquility, and that we shall guarantee to
them republican form OF government, which we
did when we approved the constitution of Louis
lana under which form that government is now
carried on.
II there are frauds in elections or usurpatIons
In office let the remedy be found In the courts of
the States or by means Of impeachment, or by the
| MISUNDERSTANDING popular elections. But let
antee Clause Of the Constitution to intsrfspe with
states further than to secure to them order and
tranquility and republican form ofgovernment,
sons are in power still 1 insist that Congress Is
not to order new election in Louisiana. If Con-
gress is to interfere, and there Is one who we
know has been duly elected and who under the
constitution OF Louisiana is entitled to the ofice
Of Governor, Congress surely is not to Interfere
IN new eiSCtiTn D1L oy placing the one
lana constitution in power.
This election contest between Kellogg and Nc
Emery was In November 4, 1872 On that day
Warmoth was unquestionabIy the duly elected
Governor OF Louisiana. We are called upon to
order an election because no ono has since been
declared duly elected. But that is Just tho case
which tho constitution of Louisiana, rs approved
by US, provides for, when, In the fifteenth article
on me page oil this case 1t says that
Monday next succeeding the day his successor
shall be declared duly elected"
If any one has In the sense Of the Louisiana con-
stitution been Gully declared elected since the 4th
of November, 1872, there is no pretense for
dering new election. II no one has been so duly
declared elected, then Wnrmoth Is Governor until
the Monday after such declaration, and our busi-
ness is to relnstate Warnoth, and not to order q
now election. Can It be insisted that when the
constitution provides that one elected by the peo-
pie shall continue in office until successor is
elected, We may interfere and deprive him of his
ONCE? live Interfere, 1t must be to place him in
power
Mr.. Carpenter. VIII my friend allow me at that
point question: Taking that view Of the case.
suppose Gov. Warmoth had continued to break
up every election from 1872 on, and had been there
four or i've years as Governor, under that pro-
interfere and order an election for the purpose Of
establishing republican government In that
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. do not see that what
Warmoth might have done might not have
done alters the constitution Of Louisiana BY
that we are To- be regulated and not BY the yaga.
that Warmoth shall be Governor until the Mon
day next after his successor is duly declared
elected. Do not understand me to be In favor of
renstating Warmoth. am not. 1 use the argu.
ment to show that we better live up TO the Con-
stitution Of the United States, guarantee to each
and let the States determine for themselves
whether they will have aWarmoth or q McEnery
or kellogg as Governor.
not reinstate Warmotb, still II should not order
new election; for the author Of the bill we are
considering tells US that McEnery had q majority
OF 9, 600 votes over kellogg. The returns Them
selves have been brought by subpoena from Lou
isiana and were before the committee, and the
Senator from Wisconsin says that.
kay Mcmillan and Pinchback were before the
committee conducting their respective sides OF the
case, and they all agreed that those were the re-
result that had been arrived ut by the De Ferret
board, that McEnery had s,SOS majority. There
Some ouestion in debate was made about there
being forgeries in these returns, and the Senator
from Wisconsin adds note to his very able
speech showing that that does not change the re-
suit. may show what those returns are pres
entity They are paper; II true, valuable; If false
worthless; but am looking at the case from my
should be to install McEnery, not to destroy his
election for 1t is certainly essential to repub
lican government that one elected to Office
should fill the Office as that one not elected
should not I'LL IL. But the Senator from Wis
consin does not favor installing McEnery for this
cast McEnery had majority, yet in consequence
of the frauds committed previous to the election
shSt TssT what was aS visa
why McEnery should not be installed. II he had
96O5 majority OF the votes cast he was primo Gcis
subsequently removed by judicial proceedings.
Mr.. Carpenter. Notwithstanding he obtained
them by fraud
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. Notwithstanding he Oh
tanned them by fraud.
Mr.. Carpenter. / cannot see now where would
pc the republican government.
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. In the State Of Wisconsin
Bsrstow was elected Governor. (I refer to the
case Of Bashford VS.. Barstow, foarth Wisconsin
Reports, page $685. He was not the true Gov
ernor no was not fairly elected, but he was in
augurated, sent his message to the Legislature.
and acted as Governor, l think some sixty days,
when an information was filed In the court OF
Wisconsin averring that Barstow was net
elected, but that Bashford was, and the re-
suit was that Barstow was ousted and
Bashford innugurated; and although, as
have understood, the incumbent had stacked the
State-house with arms the nolseless, silent power
Of the law ousted him and placed the true Gov
ernor In power. So II would be no novelty that
McEnery, with his 9606 majority, should be
placed In office and afterward removed therefrom
whom the fraud should be proven. Do not let me
be understood as favoring the idea that McEnery
should be maze Governor, for do not. insist
that 1t would be more logical than to order new
election. make the suggestion to show that We
had better stand by the Constitution ofthe country
and secure TO every State order and government
republican in form.
But, Mr.. President, again, It is not only more
logical to install Wsrmoth or McEnery than to
order o new election, but It Is more logical to
leave Kellogg in power than TO order new olec-
ton. Kellogg since 1877 has In fact been Gov
ernor of Louisiana, and is now. Laws have been
enacted with his approval, contracts have been
made, rights have vested, the people Of Louisiana
have order, and government republican In form.
That Is not all. He Is Governor In accordance
with the will OF the people OF Louisiana Ii the
conclusions Of the Senator from Wisconsin are
correct and he has given this subject much stten-