National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1874-04-16
THE LOUISIANA IMBROGII0
Continued from First Page.

| Conttnued from Fud rage.
Mr.. Carpenter. Where he could not have
used the militia befores
Mr.. Frelinghuysen, No:
| Mr.. Carpenter. Then understand the Sem
ator, as did before, TO coneede that under the
act Of 1907 the President Is only authorized to
use the army and navy In that class of cases
used the militia?
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. No; we differ again:
Ny position Is that he can only use the army
and navy, where, under the act of TBS, he
could use the militia to suppress an Insured
ton, but under the act of 1907 he may use the
army and navy in other cases shan to suppress
| fnsurrection; he may use them where there is
an obstruction to the laws Of an Individual
State.
Mr.. Carpenter. now understand the Soma
tors position. That was all wanted to do.
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. think IL would be
contrary to all rules of construction to hold
that you are to strike out those words, s'in case
Of obstruction to the laws of the United States
or any individual State, 4" and give them no sig
nihcance.
Mr.. Carpenter. Does not my friend do the
same thing with the words Sin cases where by
law he Is authorized to use the militia ~
take that to be description of the case in
which the President is authorized to use the
army and the navy. Il must be case where
|
militia. Then under the act of 1907 he may
have used the army and navy instead of the
/ militia. Then go back to the former law to
see where he may use the militia in State
and it must be a case of Instruction in q State
against the government thereof.
Mr.. Frelinghuysen. No, Mr.. President; the
significance of these words, twhere he could
use the militia, is this: where he is called
upon by the Governorsor the Legislature, as is
provided In the act of 1875 in reference to the
militia. 1t will be observed that there is in the
act of 1907 no other provision requiring the use
of the army and navy to depend upon the call to
be made by the Governor or Legislature. We thus
give effect and force If we cant every word of
the act of 1907 By giving the construction to the
statute of 1907 which my friend insists on, we
strike out the words, Gin cases of Obstruction
| to the laws of the United States or of any indi-
vidual States," and also leave the act without
any provision whatever, making call by the
Governor or the Legislature a necessary pre-
cedent to the use of the army and navy. The
President was authorized by the Constitution,
standing alone, and was authorized by the stat
utes to give the protection he did to Louisiana.
Now let me consider the second proposition,
namely, that the United States is not author
lied to order new election in Louisiana. The
Constitution provides that the United States
| shall guarantee to each Stare government
peace, tranquility, freedom from anarchy, and
State shall have government in form repub-
lican; that 1t shall not be In its frame work an
aristocracy, where authority is vested in a
privileged order; that It shall not be democ-
racy, where the people in person exercise the
sovereign power; the government shall not be
| a dcspotism, where the absolute power Is ex-
ercised by man or men without constitutional
restraint; but that the government shall be in
form republican, where the supreme power Is
intrusted to representatives elected by the peo-
pie.
The Constitution says-and whether right or
wrong we are controlled by 1t, and 1t is beyond
all argument-that we are only to guarantee q
republican form of government with order and
tranquility; and when we insist that full and
accurate significance shall be given to the
word Storm" as it occurs In this provision of
the Constitution we are not sticking in the bark,
we are not superficial, but we are going to the
very roof of the matter. We are claiming that
the Federal Government only has to do with
the form, leaving the substance, the admins
tration of the form of government, to the peo-
pie of the States. Those who would ignore
this word "form" from the restricted grant of
power given by the States under the constitu-
tional compact to the Federal Government
would usurp the very substance to the Federal
Government, and leave only the "form" or
shell of republican government to the States.
The Senator from Wisconsin submitted this
well-considered sentence to the Senate:
off am right in saying that It is the vital
element of republican government that its
rulers are chosen by the people, 1t follows that
the present government of Louisiana, lacking
this, is not a republican government"
/ do not object to his definition. Republican
government Is one the vital element of which
Is that rulers are elected by the people. Ten
years ago majority of the people of Louisiana
had no voice in electing the rulers. Was 1t a
4
was. II certainly was not, under the definition
stated. But as Congress had no right except
over the form of government, it was never
claimed that, under the guarantee clause of
the Constitution, Congress could give the right
to vote to the DISTINGUISHED majority of the peo-
pie of that State. 1t required an amendment
to the Constitution before that could be EFF
fected.
This word "form" IS not a matter of chance
as it occurs in this Constitution. The people
of the Southern States, when they entered into
this compact, knowing that large portions Of
their populations were DISTINGUISHED, and not
intending that they should have a voice In the
election of rulers, would never have agreed to
insert in the Constitution that the Federal Gov
eminent should see to 1t that their State gov
ernments should not only be republican in form,
but also should see to 1t that the rulers were
elected by the people. They stipulated that all
the people should be considered and counted in
the apportionment of representation, but not so
in the election of rulers. If we turn to the
history of this word ''form' in the Constitution
we find that 1t was carefully selected. I read
from volume 2 of the Madison Papers. On the
10Th of May, 1857, this resolution was intro
duced by Edmund Randolph as part of the plan
for the Constitution, page 734:
RESOLVED, That republican government
Using the words the Senator from Wisconsin
insists on
ought to be guaranteed by the United States
to each State"
July, when this change took place, (page
1888
q Resoleed, That republican constitution
A very different thing; now it is being
changed to matter Of governmental frame
work.
RESOLVED, That a republican constitution
ought to be guaranteed to each State by the
On the same day Mr.. Randolph Con page
l14O) caught the idea and changed his propo-
sition in this wise;
"Resolvsd, That no State be at liberty to
form any other than q republican govern
ment."
This is guarantee against despotism, against
aristocracy, against, democracy. That was
considered awhile, and eventually Mr.. Wilson
moved that which was finally adopted, no one
dissenting:
"ResolUed, That republican form of govern
ment shall be guaranteed to each State"
1t is the very substance of republican govern
ment that we give them order, tranquility,
peace, government; that we SEQ to 1t that 1t is
republican in form, and that we leave 1t to
them to regulate their own affairs.
My friend may ask whether I am content
that the people of Louisiana shall be the vic
tins of fraud, and that their rulers shall be
elected by chicanery. No, Mr.. President, I am
not content. l an not content that republican
government does not exist In Turkey or in Rus
STA; but we have no power to give these ma
tons republican government. We have more
power, IL is true, over the States than we have
over those kingdoms, but we have no more power
over the States than is granted to US IT. the
Constitution, which is to give them government
and that republican in form. We regret to see
men waste their estates and destroy their health
in dissipation; but the value of Individual free
dom, prevents such legislative restraints as
might prevent the evils. Better have individ-
ual freedom with the evils than destroy II by
chafng restraints. So better let the State
election be free with the evils than impose re-
straints and supervisors that impair the free
dom of the State.
Mr.. Carpenter. want not to answer the
Senator, but simply to ask him question, as he
did me the other day, so that 1 may distinctly
understand him. Does he maintain that in
case the three branches of government in