The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-04-05

contest between power and liberty, and IL
power will not yield liberty will not yield.
[Applause.I The gentleman from Ohio said
the other . day that by this Legislation We ran
sent but, he denied that any bill
passed Congress by free consent
There Was always opposition somewhere.
where. When Andrew johnson, In 1867, was
gated his functions over the army, was there
granite foundations Of free consent there? 1t
was then your OK which was gored, and now
us our bull. This House was bound to see
was q law which affected the liberties OF the
people: The President says he will not ap-
prove p1nL. ". re practically says, 7 want my
supplies hurry them up but will not agree
The House was seeking redress Of grsev-
ances. Inc President wants more power than
the Com mons were willing to give to Royalty
n ~ England. With reference to raising troops,
troll over the subject. We would never give
consent again that the army should be used
at the polls to shackle free election. With
troops y at t. the , polls the cartridge bog comes
Garfield to say, the other day, that he would
vote to repeal those sections as independent
clauses, but not in this way. Did he UNDER
stand him arfght2
Garfield said he would vote to repeal them
as independent propositions
Tucker said the gentleman then stood upon
the position that the President would be right
to veto the bill because OF the method In
which 1t was passed. He called attention to
the fact that Che President did not represent
the people, but the House did, and they had q
right to say how the troops should be used.
Instead Of the other side starving the army,
II was the President who said, "If you pass
this bill will veto it and starve the army"
| 1t might be said that, as Southern man, he
was opposed to the army; but he denied It..
His dreams and aspirations for this country
were to see 1t great and glorious. He wanted
to reduce power to Its minimum and raise
liberty to It's maximum. Ii he could see this
country restored to peace and prosperity all
his aspirations Of ambition would be fulfilled.
Mr.. Garfield, Of Ohio, aluding to the COM
ments that had been made on his speech, de-
MED that he had said it was revolutionary to
place legislation on appropriation bills. He
said that the method here proposed was revo-
lutionary, to place legislation on appropria-
tion bills. He said the method here proposed
was revolutionary He maintained that the
| threat of coercion had come from the Demo-
cratic caucus, which declared that II the
President vetoed the bill, the supplies would
be cut of He denied that any Republican
side threatened to die OF inantion, and they
| were doing 1t In an unconstitutional way.
The Democrats expectel to elect their Presi-
dent In 1880, and why did they not wait and
method. He closed by urging that the Presi-
dent could use troops to keep peace in post
Offices and along lines Of railroad, and there
was no law that could prevent it,
Mr.. New, OF Indiana, offered an amendment,
Of which he gave notice the other day, to add
to the first paragraph OF the pending section,
a proviso that nothing in the section
should be held or deemed to abridge or affect
out section OF the constitution of the United
States, to osend troops into State upon appli-
cation Of the Governor. Mr.. Baker, OF Indiana,
moved, as a further amendment, to add the
| clause, that any person, other than civil
officer OF the United States or State, who
should be armed with any shot gun, rifle or
other firearms, or shall have about him any
| dirk, bowie knife or other deadly weapon,
upon the day OF election, or on days provided
for the registration Of voters, nearer than half
mile of any such voting place or place Of
registration, except when lawfully called out
as posse commitatus, shall be punished by
fine not exceeding $4,000 and by imprisonment
at hard labor not less than three months or
more than three years"
The Chair said that the amendment was
not In order at this time.
Mr.. Conger persisted In rising to points Of
order, and the Chair directed him to take his
seat.
Mr.; Conger said "He wouldn't take his
seat"
The Chair-'Then 1 will direct the SER
geant-at-arms to enforce order"
Conger-1 rose to point of order and the
Chair threatens me with the sergeant-at-
arms.
This caused good deal of confusion on the
floor. Pending discussion on points OF order
and amendments the committee rose.
Mr.. Sparks asked unanimous consent that
debate be closed On the amendments at 2
o'clock tomorrow and the vote be then taken
on the proposition.
Objections were made and it was finally
agreed that the House should meet at IL
O CLOCK tomorrow and that vote should be
taken on the pending amendments at IL 80.
The House accordingly took recess till IL
O. OclOck tomorrow.