The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1879-04-09

JUS u uten ptVpOseu, VI 8t ieass iu-
sisted upon. that these voluntary pow
ers shall be used for the destruction
of the Government. | want it un-
derstood that the proposition which
| have read, aud which is the pro.
gramme announced to the American
people to-day. is this day, that
if we cannot have our way iu GER
tsio msnDer, We will destroy the
Government Of this country by using
the voluntary power, not Of the peo-
pie, but of ourselves against the Gov.
eminent to destroy it, What is cur
theory of law? /; is free consent
That is The granite foundation of our
whole structure. Notbing in this
Republic can be law that has no,
the free consent of the House, the
free consent of the Senate, and the
free consent of thr Executive Or, il
the Executive refuses bis free consent
then it must have the free consent Of
ltwo-thirds Of each BODY. Will any
body deny that? Will anybody
challenge line Of that statement
that free consent is the foundation
rock of all our institutions? And
vet the programme announced tw.
weeks ago was, tha. if the Senate re.
fused 10 consent TO the demand of the
House, the Government should stop
The proposition was then, and the
programme is now, that although
there is not Senate to veto it, there
is s,iIl third Independent factor 10
the legislative power of the Govern
ment which is TO be coerced at The
peril of the destruction Of the Gov
ernment
am not arguing at present as to
the merits Of your three amendments
at all; | en- speaking of your meth
ods, aud | say they are against the
Constitution of our country. | say
that they are revolutionary to the
core, aud that they tend to the de-
struction of the first element of Amer
lean liberty, which is free consent OF
all the powers that unite 10 make the
Law. Ii is little surprising TO me
that our friends on the other side
should have gone into this great con
test on 50 slender topic as the one
embraced 10 this particular bill Vic
ter Hugo said in his description of
the great battle of Waterloo, that two
armies we're like two mighty giants,
aud that sometimes chip under the
heel of one might determine the vic
tory. 1t may be, gentlemen, tha,
there is merely chip uDder your
heel, or it may be that you treated it
as chip on your shoulders. Bur
whether it is under your heel or on
your shoulder, it represents matter
Of revolution, and we tight for the
chip as If it were an ingot of the
richest ore. Loud applause on the
floor and in tue galleries
VOTING AGAINST A DEMOCRATIC MEAS.
URE
Let us see what the chip is. Do
the gentlemen koow what they ask,
ben they ask US to repeal Wno
made this law which you now de-
mand TO have repealed 10 the bill ?
IL was introduced into the Senate of
the United States by a prominent
Democrat from the State Of Kentucky
| Mr.. Powell IL was Insisted upon
Ia an able and elaborate speech by
bin. 1t was reported against by a
Republican Committee 10 that boiy
1t went through days and weeks Of
debate in the Senate, and when it G
nally came to be acied upon 10 that
body, this is about the way the vote
ran: Every Democrat in the Senate
voted for it, and every Senator who
voted against il was Republican.
No Democrat voted against it, but
every Democratic Senator voted fol
liz Who were they Mr. Hendricks
of Indiana, Mr. Davis of Kentucky
Mr.. johnson of Maryland, Mr. Me
Dougal Of California, Mr.. Powell oi
Kentucky, Mr. Richardson of Hi
uois, aud Mr. Salisbury of Delaware
There were fewer Republican Sena
tors who voted for it than there were
who voted against il. and only ter
for it. The bill then came over &c
the House, and was put upon its pas
sage here And how did the vote
stand 10 this body Every Demo
crat in the House Of Representatives
voted for ito of them The totsl
number OF persons who voted for il
in the House was about lI3, and ol
that nun Der majority were Demo
Gratis. The distinguished speaker oi
,he House, Samuel j. Randall. vo'
ted for it. The distinguished Chair.
man of the Committee of Ways and
Means, Fernando Wood, voted for
lit. A distinguished member from
Ohio, now a Senator from that State
Mr Pendlelon, voted for it. Ev
cry man of leading name or frame in
the Democratic party, who was then
in the Congress OF the United States,
voted for the bill: and not one against
it. 10 this House there were bu,
few Republicans who voted against
it. l was one ofthe few. Thaddeus
Stevens voted agains. it. What was
the object of the bill at that time? Ii
was this 1t was alleged by Demo.
Gratis that, in those days Of war, there
was interference with elections in the
border States There was no charge
of any interference in the States
where war did not exist But les,
there might be some infraction of the
freedom of elections. a large number
OF Republicans 10 Congress were IN
willing to give any appearance what
ever of interfering with the freedom
of elections, and voted against this
Law ss an expression of their purpose
that the Army should not be improp.
erly used in aud about any election.
The proposition now is, that IA years
have passed since the war, and NO.
one petition from any American cit
izen has come to Us asking that the
law be repealed not one memorial
has found its way to our desks com
planning Of the law, and nov the
Democratic House Of Representatives
hold that if they are not permitted to
force on another House and the Ex-
ecusive,, against their will and against
their consent, the repeal Of Law that
the Democrats made, it shall be q
su fIicient ground for starving tbi,