Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1879-04-15

he was one OF the members OF that commit
tee. tie would not Low cccupy the door II
he had not been charged 10y the committee to
give reasons for the insertion of the section OF
the bill disputed by Che senator from Maine.
The bill came here from the house. was taken
to the clerk ) desk, and thence was sent to
the committee on approx r.ations. 1t had
been reported back from that committee;
that this was the VerY bill almost in word and
letter that was reported by the committee of
conference during the last session, and would
have been agreed to by he two houses and
passed but for Their disagreement on the
amendments. The bill was now here on its
passage. 1t contained a single disputed sec
ton, to which he would now address himself.
The war caused mary departures from the
principles which were essent al to our liber-
ties. Necessity made the people bear the
objection Of the civil to the military power,
the suspension of the hdbeGs corpus and the
| presence OF armed troops at the polls
| These pass away with the neces-
sity that produced them. The single
| longer possess the power to place troops at
the polls. Their presence was menace
upon the right of free elections. This right
| Is Gxed and certain 1t came TO US from
| England md rs part OF our system Of laws.
Its protection rests ON the States, and the
| Federal government has nothing to do with
it. This is, said Senator Wallace, the only
issue in the contest, and we will not be d.
verted from 1t. On this line we stand: by it
we fall. 1t is whether the Federal
| government shall place troops at the polls
or whether the States, free from Federal
| interference, shall preserve the peace and Sc
cure free elections. | repeat that the placing
/ OF troops at the polla ID menace and a threat,
and no free people can bear it. In the bill of
| rights of nearly every State free elections
are guaranteed, while no such power is given
| to the Federal government anywhere In the
constitution The statutes of many States
| assert and protect this right. 10 1903 Penn
| sylvania asserted it by statute. New York,
Maryland snd many others have like pro-
| visions. No attempt was made t. exercise it
| by the Federal government until it was exer-
| cised in the border S'a es under the war
| power. The exercise of this power was force
alone. 1t became oppression, and in
| 1864 Senator Powell, of Kentucky, introduced
| the act of 1855. As introduced, it gave no
| power to interfere with elections, but was re-
strictive Of the evil. The Judiciary commit
tee reported against the bill on its passage.
Senator Pomeroy, oil Kansas, inserted the
words, ''Riving the troops power to keep the
peace at the polls" Every Republican voted
! for this and every democrat against it.
| Troops at the polls and free elections are in
| comp atible. The power by law to the execu-
| tive OF States or the republic 10 place troops
| at the polls is q negation of the system. We
propose to return, Senator Wallace said, to
the American system of free elections; to re-
| store to the civil power control over all the
machinery Of the government. A free
system OF government cannot tolerate even
| the possible use of force at the fountain of
power. Why shall we not restore this right2
No senator will deny the right or its
value, None assert that troops under
partisan control cOnduce to fee elections
| The legislation of 1854 was the first instance
of the mail clad hand OF the Federal gov
| eminent at the ballot-box
Senator Blame (interruptlDg) the
senator present the idea that the amendments
put Gu by Republican senators wera to con-
| troll the elections in Kentucky, where the
Democrats had n right to vote, or will he ac-
cept the sugges ton that it was to keep
rebel kentuckians from coming back
to co .trol the elections? or were
they Democratic voters, who fought against
the Union under JEFF Davis, and came back
to defend Union voters?
Gen4toF Wallace, resuLIing, said ''rhe SEN
ator from Maine has injected iuto my re-
marks the assertion that Federal power was
a war power" he said that the people want
free elections, without the shadow or sub
stance OF military power, whether State or
Federal. lilo wanted lie provisions Of the
constitution to be the law of the land. In
the mama OF the people he In part represent
ed, he asked iiaJhis menace be removed
and tnat the States have control in the pres
erya'Ion of peace at the polls, as they
should. Even in poor downtrodden Mexico,
when our troops were Ihere in 1917, q request
was made that they SHOULD not appear 1t the
polls, as 1t might be supposed that thev were
thece to control the election In progress Oar
military commander obeyed the laws of
Mexico. A free election was impossible if
we put it in the power of the President to
send armed men TO the polls. He did not
care whether there was one soldier to two or
twenty thousand miles, that one soldier acted
rlarf g-tuNh -
and the man in the blue coat, with gun in
his hand was the representative of
forty million people We PROPOSE
to take the bayonet away from the ballot. We
propose to restore &c tie o,yii power its abso-
lutte control over the military power. We
propose to restore to the American people
their own system; we neither seek to coerce
the executive nor submit to be coerced by it.
It is right Ct the Legislative power to raise
and support armies, to make rules and to
enact laws, and we follow our plain duty.
This bill votes the pay of the troops. Cannot
the law making power say how they should
be employed? We violate no provision Of the
constitution. Nc ens p4etends we do. We
act within the scope of our power, as we
Judge our duty calls US. -Four propositions
can be affirmed: Flrst-The right to place
legislation for the protection of the rights OF
the people upon money bills belongs to the
legislative poEer. and cannGs lie denied by
the judges of our powers and duties in this
regard. Our Judgment cannot be Impugned
by the executive or the Judiciary. They may
crIticise the subject matter, but not the form.
Second-This right is sanctioned by the prac-
tice of congress for many years. The revised
statutes, under the head o. general and
permanent statutes affecting the army,
contain two hundred and sixty eight sections;
of these, ninety-two came directly from the
appropriation acts. Third-It is sustained
by precedent as old as the time of Charles |,
and no power dreams Of denying its posses
sion by the commons: Fourth-Fhe legisla-
ton proposed is constitutional and necessary
and violates no right of any branch of the
Federal government, We haVe nc right to
assume that any FEATURE of the bill will meet
With diSapproVal anywhere. The bill makes
no threat to deny supplies. Let us look at
this subject OF coercion. The President,
senate and house are independent each in
sphere; each possesses a negative upon the
other. The senate and house has an abso-
lutte veto upon the other, while that Of the
Executive Is limited. If the senate refuses
to pass q house bill! because of Objectionable
matter, and makes its removal a condition to
its passage, it coerces the house TO that ex-
tent 1t uses this right. 1t is not revolu-
tlonary; 1t exercises its constitutional right
TO Judge the measure. The right Is
vital; the check is Invaluable. The
same Is true of the Executive negative
upon Inc legislative power. Ii the Executive
dlssents and on a reconsideration there are
not two thirds, the legislative branch may
decline to act. 1t has this right
or 1t has not the independence of action.
1t alone of itself aust Judge of
the illness, necessity and consttutlonality of
the measure proposed. It cannot coerce the
Executive, nor Can the Executive coerce.
Each Is responsible to the people for its con-
illusions and actions, and must act in full
view of that tribunal. If the legislative
branch could be coerced to act in this mode
the. will # the majority would be
ronage OF an unscrupulous President
and the minority could dictate legislation.
No such purpose Is intended by the constitu-
tional negative. The defensive power Of aon-
action is the protection OF The liberty of the
american people: Henry Clay, in 1877, ex-
presslY asserted the right of non action by
the legislative power. 1t has limits to its
Use 1t Is an appeal to the people. Its power
tor the destruction Of unconstitutional or of
hasty legislation is invaluable, bat 1t was
never intended nar used TO keep a yoke
upon the people, or to prevent the repeal
OF sany statute. 1t was never intended
and never used to deprive the people of free
elections or strike down the rights OF a free
people. When ii ia used for such a purpose
the people will correct the wrong. This leg
lsldtlon places a check on the military mower