The weekly Union times. [volume] (Union C.H., South Carolina) 1871-1894, 1879-06-27
THE DEMOCRATS GIVE THEIR CASE TO THE
report Of the Judiciary Committee on tie
Veto Of the Military. Interference BiN

|
Mr.Stephens, from the coinage committee
reported bill for the adoption of the metric
system of weights, measures and coinage
Ordered printed aud recommitted.
~. Mr.. Carlisle also reported the bill direct.
ing the attorney-general.t to adjust or com.
promise the claim ofthe United States under
the will ofJoseph L Lewis. Passed. This
4 is the case in which Lewis, ,farpeslrsG Ho-
4 bokca, Nj, left an estate off06dt mil.
lion dollars to be applied tothe reduction of
the national debt.
MIR. Proctor Knott, Of the House iudici.
ary committee, submitted to the House, to.
day, the committees report upon the Pres
ldential message, vetoing the House bill,
No. 1882, known as the Military Interfcr-
ence bill. The document is from 5000 to
1000 words in length, and takes up and
examines in detail all the objections made
by the President to the bill in question:
! 1t begins by stating that the danger to be
apprehcnded from the presence of troops at
the polls is sufficiently apparent and has
been repeatedly pointed out. AS long ago
as 1868 Congress found it necessary to pass
bill to obviate it, by strictl" prohibiting
military Interference with elections, except
upon the call of State or to keep peace at
the polls. That bill was approved by Elm.
coin, and is now in force as Sections 2,002
and 5 1928 of the Revised Statutes. The
words "or keep the peace 1T the polls" were
not in the original draft Of the bill, but were
added in the Senate against the remon-
stranccs:of majority of its supporters, who
| feared that they would be nisconstrucd
and used as pretuxt to evadc the law with
impunity, and escape the penalties pre-.
scrbcJ. To remove that pretext aud pre-
vent the recurrence Of practices already
shown to be dangerous, The present Congress
in making appropriations for the support of
the army struck out the words in question
The President rhereupon returned the bill
without his signature, because in his Opin-
ion, first, it twas unnecessary second, it
would prevent civil officers from using qivil
force to keep the peace at the-ppl.s-..ysuS
third, the method of repeating the clause
in question was not in harmony with the
executive taste. The first tFo objections
| the committee for the present passes with
| out remark. With regard to the third, the
report says that the manner of the repeal
was in strict conformity to the Constitution
and to the rules Of the House, apd justified
by numerous prccedents in the ANNALS of
Federal Legislation. The latest, of these
precedents was contained in the arhy appro.
tpriation bill for the present fiscal yeir, Witch
the President signed without ohjectiqY Not,
withstanding provision contained If "a
prohibiting the use Of the army as SS
comitatus. 1t might not &c improkS|.S b,
fore, for the President to devoteeshe III
ttion to the consistency of his 6sA,SsS;tg,, eb.j
not to the ordinary proprietieS( nsIT'pG
served by the Chief Magistrate in conGsnS
nicating with the supreme Legislature Of the
country.
The report then rccitcs the preparation
and passage of the separate measures Of the
srme nature, with a view to obvipiS the
Presidents objections to the meL2S
peal, and says that it, te@.Sste sbo s.dc~
without approval. 1t then takes up andS
examines in course thu Presidents reason
for vetoiug the measure in question. With
regard to tho first Of them, that the bill is
unnecessary, the report says: Whether
the opinion of majority Of representatives
of the people is entitled to any considera-
tion at the hands of the Chief Executive is
Of cours, n matter to be determined BY him
self; but it is impossible to read theEtwo
veto messages together without being struck
! by their marked difference in tone rs re-
CARDS this objection. The inevitable con-
clusion to be drawn from the first message
was that all authority to use the army at
the polls, even in aid Of civil officers, was
tacitly if not expressly abjurcd. In the
second message, however, there is no such
disclaimer. 1t is admitted that elections
ought TO be free from military interference,
but no intimation that such interference
would be unlawful On the contrary the
inference from the second message is that
under certain circumstances it would be
eninently proper. The entire argument
against the necessity Of the bill is therefore
left to rest upon the Presidents assertion
that troops have not been and will not be
used to interfere with elections during his
administration. But his term of Office will
soon end and his opinions may change
The subjects of dcspot must depasdD fer
security upon the grace their master, but
4 free people will insist upon the guarantees
Of positive law.
The second objection Of the President to
the measure under consideration is that il
would abrogate at certain times and places
a number Of existing laws. especially Sec
tion 5,298, Revised States, which he says
|