New-York tribune., 1875-03-01
THE FORCE BILL PASSED.

PROTEST OF Mr.. DAwEs-THE DEMOCRATS
yuouGH ouTwrTTED, GAIN A SUBSTANTIAL VIC
TORY.
IBy TELEGRAPH THE TRIBUNEl
WARRINGTON Feb 2S.--The desperate men VINO
have obtained control of the Administration party
have accomplished just what one OF the shrewuest
and ablost Republicans in Washington predicted
very early in the present session: They have com
m;tted their party to the suicidal policy embodied
in the Force bill and compelled it TO carry
the odium of that policy for all future time'
while they have not aud will not be
able 10 put into practice the revolutionary
measurcs they propose or to secure the slightest
political advantage from having made the attempt
10 mass them The result of the long contest in the
House. which ended at midnight, was not anuci-
pated at the close of Fridays session. and was not
it is believed by many. what 1T would nave peen
had there been more of the members of real intiu-
snce of either party to take part IN the de
bate But there was actually no free dis
eussion at all upon the bill. The members
of the Committee each reserved for hlmseh
an hour to close the debate after the previous qnes
tion had been ordered. This time they occupied
themselves or farmed it out to such members as
they selected. cutting off all such the Speak
er who is reported to have prepared very effective
speech against the BILL Mr. Dawes, who also desired
most influential men on both sides of
the House. Judge Poland was allowed
ten minutes only; Mr.. G. T. Hoar one minute and
Mr. Lamar five minutes. which he was not permit
ted TO occupy as Mr.. Orth interrupted him at the
outset and his time all used up almost before he
had begun his speech. On the other hand the lead
ing men who favored the bill consumed the lions
share of the time. Gen. Butler spoke more than
half an hour; Mr.. Tremain, 20 minutes; Mr.. White
of Alabama, 20 minutes, and Mr.. Burrows 10 min
utes.
The first noticeable speech of yesterday was that de-
ivered by MI Pierce of whose voice is
not often heard upon the 1Oor but who, when he
does speak. always says something. He deplored the
introduction Of this bill in the last hours of an ex-
pirinG Congress. and said that in his Judgment 1t
was ll-tlmed, unnecessary, and worse than useless
Nothing but an exigency of the gravest character.
he thought would justify special legislation of this
kind. lie asked:
Are not at the bottom working simply and solely
for the continuance of political party supremacy Are
aiming, do not those who advocate this bill
ami not exclusively, mainly-at party success by
this instrumentalityi Is that In fact the motive
10 the introduction OF the billf Sir, gentlemen
know 1t s. The pre,enso OF redrcssing personal
grievances and protecting individual liberty by
this bill Is not sufficiently plausible TO free
the of its supporters from this criticism. assert
Mr. Speaker that we have ample legislation already,
sufficiently rigorous and effective laws, to accomplish all
that is necessary the Southern States The revised
statutes only permit but by implication enjoin upon
lhe President and subordinate authorities the suppress
on of nsurrecOnary manifestations the protection OF
the States against domestic violations, right OF
.tizens in the exercise of suffrage. Why then add
90 tho laws this extreme power these extreme penal
ties Are mindful that constitutional liberty has
meaning or FORGET DO consider the States as prov
iDces of the General Government that we may obrude
upon them at our pleasure officers civil and military,
sending them all through the country with utter disre
gard for their autOOrlnesT
President 10 empowered to crush it, He has exercised
his powers in Louisiana, Arkansas and other States,
certainly order and tranquility reign IN Arkansas
ana Louisiana.
Mr. Pierce argued that the interest of the Republi-
can party did not require passage OF this bll and
closed with an eloquent appeal against destruction
Of the writ of babeas corpus. Judge Poland fol-
lowed with one Of the most pointed arguments that
has been heard on the floor for many days. He
said:
oppose the first and second sections Of
the bill because the ofenses therein de-
scribed are Onenses against the State and not
against the United States. Among the powers granted
40 Congress bv the Constitution is that OF calling
forth the militia TO execute the laws OF the Union,
suppress insurrect0ns and repel invasons. "Inva-
soD in this place doubtless means that OF foreign oe
aud by armed military force. The authority TO repel
1t clearly means 20 oppose by armed force, and 10
the for that purpose. In the Atm Section,
the guarantee clause, the duty Is devolved
upon National Government to protect the States
against nyason in this clause probably the term inva-
sion might well include irruption into State
by armed military force from another state. The
protection contemplated is by military force to drive
away or destroy TIE invaders and not by legislation
II il be admitted that the National Government may,
under this clause make the Invasion OF State
a crime against the United States, it must be an
Invasion in reality. 1t viii not do create artificial
make AN unlawful intermeddling by unarned men
against any state officer or state Law ian
- will i'm rnpa nf
a mere sham and farce. Under the first section
Ordinary OF resisting officer becomes in
vasion aud sO interference by unlawful with
the execution OF any State law is made vason.
There is NOT in INV Judgment either cOnstitution power
to get up a sham Invasion for the purpose punshug
Tcve W We had the mower that there can be any ncces
sty for Congress to assume jurisdiction over o6enses
which clearly within the purvieu of State power.
and punished by the laws of every state.
Second the fourth section OF the bill provides for
Furnishing State officers for violating State laws. know
OF no authority In the CONSTITUTION winch clothes
Congress with any such power. / should be glad
70 have 1t pointed out: Inls section imposes
TIE penalties In this section are denounced wholly
Registration law. Whether Congress can impose new
duties on State 0fcer ana punish him Tor not per
forming them Is certainly matter OF very grave doubt
since the decision OIL the supreme Court In Prgg
Third object 10 the thirteenth section authorizing
claimed that the courts in all parts OF the Union
aud jurisdiction Is claimed but that the
tive officers Of the law can perform their duties,
where that the laws are not well administered; that
judges partial, or that grand ures or trial jures
neglect disregard their duties. Here Is
ground Tor the suspension of the writ
1t has never been supposed to be needui usabe to
suspend the great writ OF personal liberty except in
times great and violence, when the officers
tribunals OF the law were poweress obstrucIed
as 10 be practically unable TO enforce laws
aDd afford q protection TO aud property,
though agree thai the great changes made by the Rev
oution and the abolition Of Slavery do not yet run
smoothly, and there yet remain many OF the bitter
1regs OF Slavery working wrong and Violence yet
no remedy for them by the suspension or the