The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-12-14

tended to protect had all been Threatened
by laws passed by the Congress of the
United States. He argued that Congress
had no right to undertake the control OF
the several States. He had come TO TINS
Congress more seriously impressed with
the overhanging presence of dangers TO
our form Of government than ever peiore,
and he had come convinced that II Was
his duty to oppose, successfully or un'
successfully, this consolidated march
which the Republican party has set on
| foot. He proposed to stand by a strict
construction of the Constitution, and de-
MED that in any of the Southern States
there, had been discrimination against
voters on account ofrace or color by any
law or statute of such State. There was
coming to this people time when their
love Of law would be tested, and he pro-
posed to stand upon that law, and let the
consequences take, care Of themselves.
The duty Of Senators was not as party
men; not as Democrats; not as Repub'
licans, but as Americans-to do all IN
their power to uphold the Constitution as
handed down to us by our faith, RS, and
not undertake a settlement OF the ques-
tions not confined to the Senate or Con
gress by the Consultation. .H ..., "A
On motion ofMr. Whyte, 1t was order
ed thatthe resolutions of Mr.. Edmunds
be voted upon separately. He said he
would vote against the first three resolu
tions, because he accepted the decision OF
the Supreme Court of the United States
in constituting the Fourteenth Amend
ment. In regard to the recent electionin
some of the States, he was in favor OF
immediate and prompt action, and he
proposed to offer a substitute for the last
resolution, which would cause thorough
scrutiny ofthe election in those States.
MIR. Merrimon submitted an amend
ment to the first resolution providing
that the Committee shall he confined to
inquiry whether the right of any person
to vote had been denied or abridged by
the Constitution or laws of said States.
Rejected-yeas "a, nays 80, strict party
vote.
Mr.. Bogy moved to strike out the pre-
amble. Rejected.
Mr.. Mcdonald moved to strike out the
first part of the preamble relating to the
Fourteenth Amendment, RejeCted-yeas
2i nays 40. .
The first resolution authorizing the
Committee to inquire into the elections
in South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama,
Mississippi, Florida and Louisiana for the
years lS7475 and 1876, &C., was then
agreed to-ycas Al; nays 20, party
vote.
The second resolution authorizing the
employment of Stenographers, and EN-
powering the Committee to send for per
sons and papers, &c, was agreed to with
out division.
The third resolution in regard to dep
ositions was also agreed to.
DECEMBER 6, 1875.
Mr.. Withers called up the resolution
submitted by him yesterday, requesting
the President to inform the Senate, if not
with the public interest,
under what authority and for what pur'
pose troops Of the United States occupied
the City of Petersburg, Virginia, on the
9TH of November, 1876, the day of gen
era election
Mr. Logan moved that it be referred to
the Committee on Military Affairs.
A lengthy debate followed, during
which Mr.. Withers argued that it was not
usual to refer such resolutions. |
Mr.. Logan said he had heard no reason
for this inquiry. There was no
evidence that the troops were sent to
Petersburg for any improper purpose.
There was no evidence that they didany |
thing wrong Was the doctrine to be as
serted that troops of the United States |
could have no place in any State where
they could be stationedP The President |
of the United States had right to send
troops any where in the United States for
lawful purpose. Unless there was some |
charge against the President for putting
troops in Petersburg improperly, this
resolution should 60 to the Committee on |
Affairs.
Mr.. Withers said in the absence of ir-
formation on this subject, he cou not
say whether the troops were there law
ully or unlawfully, and it was for the
purpose of getting information that he
offered the resolution.
MT. uuTLlldl bdlu bllO NOIJ ODlCCO VI
his resolution was to find out if the
roops were sent to Petersburg for law
ul purpose. He read from the Revised
statutes to show the law under which the
loops could be ordered, and said the
burden of proof rested upon those who
ent troops TO that city to show that their
presence was necessary to repel armed
,nemies of the United States to keep
,eace at the polls.
Mr., Logan denied that the troops in
Petersburg were at the polls orinterfered
Ii the election. There had been no vlo.
alton of any law i'll sending the army
here.
Mr.. Withers said his information was
0 The effect that troops had ueen ordered
mere in response to All application OF the
United States Marshal fol the Southern
district Of Virginia, to remain during the
lection.
Mr.. Thurman spoke Of the British laws
nd said, under an act Of Parliament,
10 troops could be stationed within
nile Of a pollil g-place on electlOn-day.
he Senator from illinois Logan seemed
o think that the President Of the United
tates could fill town full of troops on
lection day without any violation of the
Aw. The Senate of the United States
ad a right to know whether or not the
resident had been imposed upon in Or
ering troops to Petersburg.
Mr.. Logan said if the doctrine of the
enator from Ohio (rhurman) was cor
ect, the soldiers could not be quartered
n any STATE on the day of an election,
nd he Logan supposed the arrange
nents must be made To send them up in
balloon until after the election. Mr..
logan argued that the meaning of the
taIule read by the Senator from Ohio
rhurma.i) was that trOC ps should not be
leld at the polls TO intimldate men, The
rgumenJ that the troops could not be
i'll town Whenan election was
'elng held there was contrary to common
ense. At the request Of Mr. Logan Mr..
Yithers then lnouItied the resolution to
cad as follows: .r..g
"Re8oIved, That the President be and is
,prehv rpnlested 10 iufIrm the Spnate If