The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-04-02

The enemies Of a free ballot are lost in adj
miraton OF the following passage in DE
EoLYER GARF1ELDs latest speech, which
they accept az their keynote:
what i. our theor, Of law tits free consent That
the granite foundation Of whole structure Nothing
IN this republic be law that has not the free con
Of the House. the tree consent OF the Senate and the
frce the Executive. Or. II the Executive re-
buses his consent then II must have the tree consent
VI two-thirds Of each body VIII anybody deny that
viii anybody challenge line Of that staiemen-that
nee consent is foundation rock OF all our insutu
nonsfn
Nevertheless, DE GoLYER GARFIELD de-
mands that an army bill shall be made n
law, out Of which shall have been plucked,
ngainst the free consent Of the House and
against the free consent Of the Senate, it's
most important provision.
Under DE GoLYER GARFTELD's new in
depreciation, free consent means something
In which the majority OF the House and the
majority OF the Senate have no part, II being
reserved solely for the minorities and for
HAYES. According to this quack logic, when
n minority of the House and the Senate
have voted against u bill making full annual
appropriations for the army. and when
HAYES has vetoed II, unless the majority OF
the House and of the Senate hack and patch
the bill so as TO make IL acceptable no longer
10 themselves but TO the minority and to
HAYES, their course is revolutionary and in
ccndiary. To refuse TO abdicatc their re-
sponsibllity as the majority, fresh from the
peoples elections. is called coercing the mi
nority but for the minority to conspre with
HAYES to refuse supplies to the army unless
the Supply bill can he altered to suit them,
is no coercion Of the majority. The free
consent DE GoLYER GARFIELD pirates OF
would destroy majority rule Already we
have had enough Of setting aside, by hmsy
sophistries, the rights and the recorded
votes OF majorities.
There is involved in the pending conflict,
besides the free consent of Legislators, a free
ballot for the people. This Is the true issue,
which De GOLFER GARFIELD cannot beiog.
AS the law stands to-day, half n dozen
schemers may easily make disturbance at
IN election, so that an army officer can
march in his troops "to keep the peace"
Here is a standing menace to the right of
representation. n peril 10 American freedom.
The act Of 1865 sought to put an end to all
dangers Of military despOtism at elections,
but it left one danger alive. De GoLYEl
GARFIELD, garbling history, figures the
Democratic congressman Of that day as OPP
posing the law they now sustain. Not so
1t was they who introduced the plan for UNI
Stacking the ballot, and they voted against
the exception which the majority fastened
upon it. 1t is a noteworthy and noble fact
that their first effort after recovering the
control Of Congress has been TO wipe that
exception from the statute book and TO take
the bayonet from the polls
DE GoLYER GARFIELD says that HAYES
will lend his aid TO the conspiracy for
thwarting this effort. Let HAYES beware
lest, in joining the struggle Of military
power against free ballot, he himself IL
ground 10 powder.