Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1879-04-29


trlct to which he may belong, and is
otherwise qualified according to the
laws Of the State in which he offers TO
vote.
The foregoing enactments would
seem sufficient to prevent military in
reference with elections, but the last
congress, toremove all apprehension of
such interference, added to this body
Of law section 10 of the act entitled
an act, making an appropriation for
the support Of the army for the fiscal
year, ending June 80, 1879, and for
other purposes, approved june 18,
1878, which is as follows
Sec. 10. From and after the pas
sage of this act it shall not be lawful
to employ any part of the army of
the United States as a posse comita-
tus, or otherwise, for the purpose of
executing the laws, except in such
cases and under such circumstances
as such employment of said force may
be expressly authorized by the CON
stitution or by act of congress, and no
money appropriated by this act shall
be used to pay any expenses incurred
in the employment of any troops in
violation of this section, and any
person wilfully violating the provi-
sions Of this section shall be deemed
guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon
conviction thereof, shall be punished
by fine, not exceeding $4,000 or i'm
prisonment not exceeding two years,
or both Of such fine and imprison-
ment.
This act passed the senate after full
consideration without single vote
recorded against it on its final passage,
and by majority of more than two
thirds it was concurred in by the
house Of representatives.
The purpose of the section quoted
was stated in the senate by one of its
supporters as follows Therefore, |
hope without getting into any contro.
yersy about the past, but acting wisely
for the future, that we shall take
away the idea that the army can be
used by general or special deputy
marshals, or by any marshal merely for
election purposes, or posse, or using
them about the polls, or ordering them
anywhere else where there is no cleo
ton going on to prevent disorders or
suppress disturbance that should be
suppressed by peace officers of the
State; or if they must bring others to
their aid they should summon unor-
ganized citizens and not summon off :
GERS and men Of the army as a posse
cOmitatus to quell disorders, and thus
get upa feeling which will be disas-
trous to peace among gthe people of the
country.
In the house of representatives the
object Of the act of 1873 was stated by
the gentleman who had it in charge in
similar terms. He said But these
are all minor points and insignificant
points compared with the great priv
ciple which was incorporated by the
house in the bill in reference to the
use of armed men in peace. The SEN
ate had already included what they
called and what we might accept as a
principle, but they had stricken out
the penalty, and had stricken out the
word expressly, so that the army
might be used in all cases where i'm
piled authority might be interfered
with.
THE house committee planted them
selves firmly upon the doctrine, that
rather than yield this fundamental
principle, for which for three years
this house had struggled, they would
allow the bill to fail, notwithstanding
the reforms we had secured, regarding
these reforms of but little consequence
alongside the great principle that the
army of the United States in time of
peace should be under the control of
congress and obedient to its law. AE
ter long and protracted negotiation the
senate committee have conceded that
the principle in all its length and
BREADTH including the penalty, which
the senate had stricken out, we bring
you back, therefore, report with the
alteration of single word, which
lawyers assure me is proper to be
made restoring to this bill the prin-
ciple for which we have contended SO
long and which is so vital to secure
the rights and liberties of the people.
Thus have We this day secured to
the people of this country some great
protection against a standing army,
which cost struggle of 300 years for
the commons of England to secure for
the British people"
| Upon this brief review of the sub
ject it sufficiently appears to us that
under existing laws there can be no
military interference with elections.
! No case Of such interference has in
fact occurred since the passage of che
act last referred to- No officer of the
United States has appeared under
Grders at any place of election in any
State. No complaint even of the
presence Of United States troops has
been made in any quarter.
1t may, therefore, be confidently
stated that there is no necessity for
1 the enactment of the section of the
bill before me to prevent military in
reference at elections. The laws
already in force are all that is reauired
for that end. But that part of section
6, of this bill, which is significant and
vitally important, is the clause on
which it is adopted, and will deprive
the civil authorities of the United
States Of all power to keep the peace
at congressional elections.
Congressional elections in every
district, in every important sense. are
justly matters of political interest
throughout the whole country In
each State every political party is
entitled to share Of the power which
is conferred by legal and constitutional
suffrage. 1t is the right of every
citizen possessing qualifications pre-