The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1876-10-31
The Proclamation an Untruth.

Judge Hoadley of Cincinnati, in an in
terview with a reporter of the Commercial,
brings to notice singular fact in connec-
nection with the presidents South Carolina
proclamation. The proclamation pretends
to be issued in strict conformity to the con-
stitution and the law. The only provision
in the constitution touching the case is the
clause in section four Of article four which
provides that the United States shall
protect each state against invasion; and,
on application of the legislature or of the
executive when the Legislature cannot be
convened), against domestic violence. u
This is what the constitution says. The
law on the subject (section 297, revised
statutes, page l,034, is as follows:
f" In case OF an instruction In any state
against the government thereof, 1t shall he
lawful for the president on application
OF the legislature of such state, or of the
executive when the legislature cannot be conven-
cd, % call forth such number Of the militia OF any
other state or states, which may be applied for, as
he deems sufficient to suppress such insurrection
on like application, To employ, for the same pur
poses, such part Of the land naval forces OF TIT
United States rs he deems necessary"
1t is customary in solemn aud formal
state papers to rocite the language of the
law they refer to, and by authority oil
which they are issued-and the presiden,
affects to do this in his South Carolina
proclamation. But there is one very re.
markable feature in that document; while
quoting the law given above, IL mterpoldteI
clause not found az the LaU. Here are
the words in which the proclamation begins
with the interpolated passage marked il
italics:
WHEREAS, It is provided in the constitution o
the United States that the United States shall pro
tect every state In this Union application OF tn
legislature, or the executive when the legislatur
cannot be convened, against domestic violence
and
WHEREAS, By laws In pursuance of the above, 1
provided In the laws of the United States that Il
all cnses of lnsurrecton In any state OF 0bstruC
lion 10 TIE tdics thereof, It shall be lawful for tn
president Of the United States on application OF th
Legislature OF such state, or the executive when tn
Legislature cannot be convened, TO call for the mi
ita oil any other state or states, or to employ sue
part OF the land or naval force as shall be judge
necessary for the purpose OF suppressing such in
surrection or causing the laws TO be duly exc
cuted."
We have here the extraordinary specta
Gle of a president utterirg an untruth as
warrant for solemn proclamation Q
warning against an assumed instruction
in one Of the states of Union. He declare
that it is provided in the laws of tn
United States that the president shall in
tervene in state in all cases ''of obstruc
ton to the laws thereof" This is nc
true; the president, or the secretary G
state. had the law before him when b
wrote the proclamation, and could see tina
it is not true. The law does not state wha
the president declares. The recital in tn
proclamation is not the law, and it is no
creditablo to the presidents official homo
to pretend that it's
1t is easy enough to see why the inter
polation was made. The president wa
determined to interfere in South Carolina
But there is no lawful excuse for his doin
so; there is neither an invasion, nor a
instruction. So, the proclamation make
pretext for interference by stretching tn
law so as to cover his design. Such an ex
ample Of president of the United State
declaring that to be law which is not Law
and making falsehood the occasion 70
employing the war powers Of the govern
ment is without precedent in our history