The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1879-05-08

rs to the course I would suggest, or be
ready to accept and vote for in the eau
Gus. My impression is, however, that
there will not be found q majority OF the
House to oppose extending the appro-
priations by joint resolution and giving
to the country the opportunity OF eX-
pressing itself, through the press and its
public men, upon the issues involved:
In the meantime, before any proiler OF
said extension is made, I think the re-
pealing clause in the army bill should be
passed separately and submitted to the
President for his approval.
The repeal OF the jurors test oath,
which is now annexed to the legislative |
appropriation bill, and the proposed
modification of the supervisors law,
should also be enacted in separate form
and submitted to him also. if these
measures, presented independently,
should be vetoed by the President, then
the Democracy, which is the party of
the Constitution, should take its stand
upon the Constitution and refuse to vote
he taxes Of the people unless their griev-
ances are redressed. This is the unques-
toned right of Congress as it was held
by the Commons of England for over
two hundred years. The ultimate result
cannot be told until the President has
had the opportunity of passing upon the
repeal of these measures which the rep
resentatives of the people deem to be op-
pressive and obnoxious.
The issue for the repeal of the Federal
election laws came from the Northern
wing of the Democratic party. They
were more concerned in the repeal of
these statutes than we of the South, for
the history of the legislation by which
they were enacted shows that they were
designed to affect the elections in the
Northern States, and principally in New
York, Philadelphia, and other large cities
of that section.
The purpose of the Republican party
is manifestly, by threats and intlmlda-
ton, 10 force the North into solid Sec
tional attitude in order to regain thereby
the power which they-the Republicans
have lost by the past fourteen years OF
corruption.
In 1867 when they controlled both
branches of Congress they bullied and
coerced the Executive, and now, with
the Legislature of the country in the
hands of the Democracy, intrenching
themselves behind the Executive, ihey
are repeating the same experiment OF
/ forcing Congress to submit, in turn, to
the dictation of the President.
CONGRESSMAN EvINS
thinks q conservative course is the wisest
to be pursued, and indeed the only safe
one. The Democratic majority have
done all they could to secure the repeal
of the odious laws in question. 1t was
in the power of the President to defeat
their efforts, and he has exerted that
power. The responsibility for the fail
ure rests upon him and his party alone,
as the Democrats cannot pass the meas
ures in the face of their opposition. We
ought now to accept defeat gracefully
and pass the appropriation bills at once,
without the political riders. We ought
even TO pass them first and then offer
bills repeating the obnoxious laws as
separate measures. This course would
leave the Republicans without excuse for
their opposition as we would be acting
in manifest and perfect good faith and
they could not say that we were holding
back the appropriations by way of threat.
If they refused at last to pass these meas.
ures we colld go before the country and
let the people decide upon them. Ihave
no doubt as to what their decision would
be.
1t is important for us to get these issues
before the country without affording any
occasion for having our motives 80 much
as doubted, and without the measures
themselves being entangled with any
other question. They should be fairly
and squarely presented for judgment
upon their merits alone. By adopting
this course we would relieve ourselves OF
any Charge that we have used coercive
measures or questionable methods. We
should not allow ourselves, as Southern
men, to be diverted from what we think
is the true interest of the people, by any
pleas of party necessity on the part OF
the Northern Democrats. We are really
the majority of the Democratic party in
each branch of Congress, and will be
held responsible for the legislation of
Congress. We have the right, therefore,
to dictate the policy to be pursued.
ANY attempt to adjourn without passing
the appropriation bills will be considered
revolutionary by the country, and we
cannot afford to be put in that position.
We have been between the upper and
neither millstones long enough. We are
willing to do the voting and allow the
Northern Democrats to hold the offices,
but we claim the right TO shape the
policy of the party for which we must
and will be held responsible. What
Conkling said in his recent speech is true,
that we are the controlling power in both
branches, and while it may be very
pleasant for Northern politicians, seek
ing their preferment, to keep up sectional
strife, our interests demand that we shall
have cessation OF such strife. Should
we adjourn without providing the means
of carrying on the government, believe
it would solidify the North as much as
did the firing upon Fort Sumter in 1861.
Our Northern Democratic friends might
then find the tide too strong for them,
and leave US in the lurch by seeking new
| hllldUCGS Will Vic ~thliOuhi Va oiSSh
back party. We cannot afford to take
the risks which they can. We cannot
afford to play cat to their monkey any
longer. If there are any chestnuts to he
had they will get them-the burnt paws
are ours every time. They stand iii
very different position before the country
from ours. It is natural that the North
ern people should look upon us with dis
trust, coming as We do into control of the
government SO soon after the war, and
we must learn to labor aud to wait.
do not mean that we should abandon
the struggle. We must renew it OH every
occasion until we accomplish our pur-
pose, but we must confne ourselves to
the use of regular and constitutional
methods.
1t is in no sense "back down" for Us
to take this course. We have certainly
pressed the matter as far as we could.