The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-05-28

and Mr. HUMPHREY OF Wisconsin argues
that 1--WE need never apprehend that an
army OF 10000 or 10000 is dangerous TO our
liberties" Mr.. MADISON said: III insur-
rcctions should arise, the people ought I'M
uuestlonably to be employed to suppress
them, rather than n standing army" but
Mr.. CALDWELL Of Tennessee, though voting
for army reduction, goes out OF his way TO
defend the conduct Of the Governors OF
West Virginia, Maryland, and pcnnsyl-
vanla, last year, in calling for the standing
army to suppress local riots; and DE
GoLYER GARFIELD, reviewing the same
transactions, says: " ] am for the reign OF
law in this republic, and for an army large
enough to make it sure"
Such are the echoes to-day In Congress OF
the monstr0us uttorances OF Hayes War
Secretary six months ago. The theory OF a
free republic Is that government must rest
on the just consent of the governed; tho
proposal OF HAYES is to have It rest on "a
strong Federal force stationed In the vicin-
ity OF our great cities" at all times, with q
view to prevent" an uprising.
In proposing this scheme, HAyEss War
Secretary has attributed 10 the founders OF
the Constitution sentiments exactly oppo-
site to those which they uttered. Our
fathers who framed the Constitution" he
says, doubted the wisdom of relying upon
the militia" but, as Mr.. kIMMEL has re-
minded Congress, the very Constitutions Of
New Hampshire Vermont, Massachusetts,,
Pennsylvania. Delaware, Maryland, Vir-
ginia, and North Carolina expressly de-
clared, In so many words, that standing
armies In time Of peace are dangerous to
liberty" WASHINGTON declared that the
honor, safety, and well-being of our country
essentially depend" ON good militia or
ganization. JOHN ADAMS called the militia
I" the natural and safe defence OF the coun-
try" JEFFERSON and FRANKLIN held SINH
lar opinions. Even Gen. KNOX, WASHING
TONS War Secretary, pronounced an encr-
getic militia " the capital security Of free
republic; and not n standing army, forming
distinct class" Yet lIAYEss War Secre-
tary says that "our fathers doubted the
wisdom OF relying upon the militia" in civil
disturbances, and SO employed Federal
troops for this purpose" They did not so
employ Federal troops. Their small stand
ing army--and the army organized under
the act of 1890 was only l,273 strong-was
expressly raised " for protecting the from
tiers from the dcpredations of hostile In
dams" When the Pennsylvania whis-
key war broke out, WASHINGTON employed
the State militia OF New Jersey. Pennsyl-
vania, Maryland and Virginia TO suppress
1t, and Congress thanked them. One Of the
earliest acts Of the founders of the Govern
ment was to provide for national militia,
which. however, in the tranquility OF those
times, rusted out from inaetion, and fell to
pieces.
Now, then, why does HAYEs's War Secre-
tary argue against the militia, and dissuade
Congress from doing anything for it, even
classifying the opinions aud practice OF the
founders Of the republic? One OF those
founders, MASON of Virginia. once said:
Should the general Government wish to
render the militia useless, they may neglect
Them and let them perish in order to have
n pretence for establishing standing
army" In the same spirit, ELBRIpGE GER
RY OF Massachusetts said: Whenever Gov
ernmcnts mean to invade the rights and lib
critics Of the people, they always attempt to
destroy the militia in order to raise an
army upon their ruins"