The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1879-06-21
CULLEN ON STATES NIGHTS.

| luton OF the TcpuD!lCdN NulloIld! COnNtHllOI
Of 1860 quoted in our last, a. IA simple pro
nounccment against the "lawlcss invasion by
armed force" United States troops or border
ruflians) of Kansas in 1855. &c. The resolution
had manifestly much deeper meaning; in
short, ITS real meaning is brought out by tho
communication Of correspondent given be
low, so that We need pursue that branch Of the
subject no further.
We shall only add, in reference to the demo
cratic doctrine of states rights as applicable
to the use Of the army at the polls during cleo
tons in the states, (and it is only in that con.
necton that the subject is under discussion
that under the constitution the sole power to
prescribe the qualifications Of voters for mem
bers of congress and presidential electors, and
the manner Of voting, counting the ballots and
declaring the result, as also the appoint
ment Of the officers to conduct the cleo
tons, keep the peace at the polls, dc, is
vested in the states 1t is true the trainers of the
constitution, anticipating the possibility Of the
states taking NO steps TO elect members OF con.
gress and presidential electors, as a matter of
selfprcservation, provided that IN such case
the general government may make regulations
Of its own to hold elections; but it is obvious
that in such case congress must appoint its
own officers and take full charge of the cleo
tions. No such contingency, however, having
arisen, and congress having taken no steps to
hold elections in the states, the sole, exclusive
and whole management of the election of con
gressmen and presidential electors, the same
as of all state officers, rests with the states. As
the general government has no right to direct
or interfere in the remotest degree with any
state officer, from Governor down to constable,
IN the discharge of his duties; so it has no
right TO interfere, by its marshals, supervisors
or military with the state officers in the con
duct Of any election. Congress must either
take full Charge Of the elections aAd run them
IN its own way with its own officers, or keep
hands off. Otherwise any interference by ma
tlonal with the state officers in the business is
an impertnence and an outrage, as fully as
would be the interference on the part OF our
nONtl VIII fltCtlOHS III NuUdllu
England. These are simple propositions which
no man OF sense and intelligence disputes, and
which will serve, we hope, once and Tor all, to
convey TO our esteemed cotemporary Of the
R,Dutiicdn what is exactly the democratic
idea on the subject"
We now append the remarks OF CORES
pondent already referred to:
The resolution of the republican national
convention OF 1860, affirming the doctrine of
states rights and quoted approvingly by the
FREE TRADER OF last week, see has called
out whole column of sophistry and scurrIlity
from the Republtc0n. But the resolution quoted
does not assert the whole doctrine of states
rights and state sovereignty as taught in those
days by the republican party. | was repub-
lican then as far as knew about politics, be
cause | believed the republican party to be n
states rights party, contending for the liberty
principle IN government and against the unjust
cncroachments or the general government
The republican state conventions then notably
those Of New York and Wisconsin IN 1858 af
firmed the whole doctrine OF the Virginia and
Kentucky resolutions and asserted the right of
the states to forcibly resist the enforcement of
the fugitive state law, passed under Washing
ton and re-enacted with but slight changes un-
der Fillmore and decided by the Supreme
Court of the L. s. TO be constitutional Not
only did they counsel resistance, but il Is mat
ter Of history that the state authority, where
the republicans had CONTROL by means of per
sonal liberty bills passed by their state legis
latures and by the decisions OF the state courts
did make iorcible resistance to the execution
Of that law. We can all remember when Unit
nI Chnl Il %
and their power ignored by state authority At
that time they not only contended that the gen
cral government had no authority to interfere
with the rights of the states in controlling
elections, but went TO the extent of condemn
ing the interference by che general government
with elections in the territories, where II was
never disputed but that the general govern
ment had supreme authority. If it was an out
rage to send national soldiers to the then ter.
ritory oi Kansas To keep the peace at the polls
(as was then asserted by Buchanan, but really,
as was largely believed, to compel the people
of Kansas territory to adopt certain state con.
Stltuion,) il II less an outrage now to send
troops INTO the tree states (ostensiby Tor the
purpose, as the republicans assert, to keep the
peace at the polls, but really, as we all know,
TO compel the people to vote To keep the spolls
party in power where we already have abund
ant laws to secure honest elections and are pre-.
pared TO maintain them. Was the outrage
committed by national soldiers in Kansas
greatly exaggerated by northern fanatics at
the time) greater than that which was commit
ted in the state of Louisiana under the infam.
Gus Grant regime, when soldiers were marched
INTO the state house and the Legislature organ.
lied at the point of the bayonet TO SUIT the
reigning party IN power at Washington? These
old republicans, who were heroes and men of
principle in those days had better investigate
tins matter and see how far the republican
party has departed from the doctrines OF their
fathers and not be led entirely by their organs.
Party is nothing with me but principle every.
thing. W