The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1879-03-19
Wednesday, March 10. 1879.
rhe Tug Of War--I!aycs IL the
Democrats.

DeStn yesterday IIoiiilStH ~ '" '"N w
the most memorable in the history OF
these United States. 1t means something
more than just the transaction of uniin-
<ished business. The unfinished business
it has to discuss contains in it elements
of party strife and diSscnSion and posi-
bilities of civil diScord that may cause
revolution. Thc position Of affairs and
i the attitude of parties in Washington to-
day are fraugllt with as much concern to
this country Us ever was the Tca-duty
or the Stamp Act, Modification or Save
ry. Two OF the three great departments
of our government-the legislative and
the eX~ecutive-Stand in open defiance of
each other, each calling uponthc other to
yield, but neither seeming disposed to
B1EadSe one inch. OstcnSibly 1t
seems as if the President were single
and alone daring the House of Rcprcscn-
tatives to mortal combat, but really it Is
the Republican party, whose head Hayes
is, challenging to a tug Of war the Demo-
cratic party which controls the House.
It is something more-it is the party Of
Federal centralism against the party of
/ non-interference with State rights, Ham
iltonianism against Jctlersonianism, dcs-
potism against constitutional freedom.
This struggle was inevitable. The Re-
publican party blinded by their success
in the civil war miStook or pretended to
mistake the results of the war for the tri-
umph of federal Capitalization. Their
agitation of the slavery question prorok-
ed the war, but the safety and permanent
CIV OF the Union was the cause for which
tho North fought, Democrat and-1scpub-
lican alike fighting for the federal gov
ernment. No doubt, the downfall of the
Confederacy meant the establishment Of
the Union, but it did not mean the de-
struction OF the rights of Statcs-evcn
of Southern States. Only one of these
rights-the right to secedc from the part
nership of States-was decided by the
war and judgment pronounced against it.
The surrender at AppomattoX did not
mean the surrender Of those State rights
which had not been expressly delegated
" ShC SoNS INV - w
the purposes of the triumphant party to
consider that the safety of the Union de-
manded the destruction of several others
of those undelegatcd State rights. Their
occupation gone, their "mission'-ncgro
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS by the war,
the Republicans found themselves 4 par
ty in power but without q policy, with
nothing to keep them from d~isintegration
but the cohesive power OF public plum
DER and the adhesive qualities of Office
holders. They foresaw that the lcgiti-
mate results Of negro emancipation and
acknowledgements would at no distant day
re-instate the Democrats in office and
make the Southern States more powerful
in Congress than they had been before.
To prevent this undesirable consumma-
ton, they, while still in the maj ority,
enacted laws unconstitutional in their cs-
sence and centralizing in their purpose
and effect; notably the laws relating to
the test oath and the presence of federal
supervisors and of troops at the polls.
Wise in their generation, the Republicans
framed this treble-acting machine than
which no better could have been devised
for the purpose Overwhelmingly, the
perpetuation of Republican rule, which
they hin is identical with the ''safcty OF
the Union.' The machine has worked
well-for them. If permitted, it will
still work well for them ever when their
party is in minority. With Republican
supervisors and and troops at the polls,
with packed Republican jurics in the
United States courts, with Republican
United States judges and Il Republican
Supreme Court OF the United States,-
how could the machine do otherwise
with any raw material put into it than to
turn it out a pure Republican fabric?
And mark how the constant juXta-posi-
ton Of :he two terms "Rcpublican' and
'tunited States induced the delusion in
not only the negroes mind but in the
minds of white Republicans too, that
they were synonyms. What could Dem
oerats expect from such q machine ?
Nothing more nor better than they got.
Can men gather grapes from ~thorns, or
figs from thiStles? Just us soon can JUS
tice be done by tile use of a party ma
chine, made by a party and for that par
ty, and run in the party's interest. From
the raw material furnished by the testi-
mony Of the supervisors to the finished
fabric found in the decisions of the Su-
preme Court, the whole process was that
of q vast fraud-factory.
The Republican majority has disap-
pearel. Democrats control Congress.
It is time for the machine to change hands
or to stop. Democrats cannot run it con
sistently with the de-centralizing doc
trines of Jefferson. They must destroy
it; and the time has come for its destruc-
irtion, and the Democrats are the men to
: do it. They have framed bills repeating
4 the three obnoxious and demonstrations
laws. Hayes will not sign them. Hayes
-.openly says he will veto them. They
! will then tag them on to The appropria-
.tion bills, a veto on which will cut Off all
money supplies in all thc departments Of
the government. The country will then
Z <pC appcalSu ~ ootH, anu ultlI soillC
decision is reached or some M of the OPP
: posing parties yields, the wheels Of gov
eminent will be stopped, for it is money
that makes the mare go.
The Republicans claim that to tag the
repeating acts to the appropriations is
Revolutionary" The Democrats rctort
with force that the acts they wish to re-
peal were in part enacted by a Republic
= can Congress on an appropriation bill.
II it was not revolutionary to enact them
embodiedin all appropriation bill how can
it be revolutionary to repeal them in an
appropriation bill The Republicans
also say that as the supervisors are one
Democratic and one Republican the sys-
tenn can do neither party injustice: Like
the quack doctors medicine they think
if it does the Democrats no good it can do
them no harm. Why then be so anxious
to maintain it? This is a blade that cuts
both ways. The Republicans denounce
e thasgovermental deadlock as unprecc-
dented. Let the Democrats reply that
! there is as yet no precedent for a Presi-
2 81 L ..oko n .nroo1ir~ onf Tho Pn,~,1