The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1879-04-17

The debate in the house on the Army |
bill has left the republicans in very IN |
comfortable position. Even before the bill
left the house they discovered that they
dared not take grounds in favor of using
troops at the polls, and in order to get out
Of this position they raised the senseless
CRY of revolution" and before they had
fairly sounded this whoop they were sorry
for it, as Gen. Garfield himself was
obliged to admit at the close Ofthe debate,
that the democrats we're acting within the
constitutional rights Of the house and in
accordance with republican precedent.
They now see that the people will not be
made to believe veto'can stand on the mere
fact that political legislation is tackled on
appropriation bills, especially when such
political legislation cannot be condemned
per sc. To cover up their blunder they
are now trying to coerce the president into
Yetoing the, bill right or wrong and to save
the party under cover of the dust they can
raise by such speeches as those made by
Logan and Blaine in the senate, wherein
the latter recounted the fading glories of
the republican party, while the former
dropped the Army bill and talked about
measures that were not before that body
and have not even been considered By the
house. He went so far as to say, that the
president should veto these measures,
which he guessed would come up in such
q shape as to justify a veto. His attempt
to ridicuIe the danger of using troops at
the polls, by stating that 90 soldiers of the
regular army was all that there was in
o Alabama, and that there was only 81 in
Delaware, etc., was most effectually an
swered by Wallace, who said:
The question before the senate and the
country is not how many or how few troops
may be 10 any state, but it is whether war
measures shall be enforced in times OF
peace. One soldier on ten thousand
square miles, lis as strong as ten thousand
soldiers, so long as the government is be-
hind him.
I'VE have no intention of revolution.
Our processes are defined by the constltu-
ton. The president has no right to say
how the laws shall be made; he has nc
right to criticise our methods of legislation
or base his veto thereon, but he has right
to criticise the matter. The president has
right to the veto. 1t is guaranteed hin
by demonstration, aud / would not take
the right from him. We do not purpose
to 90 beyond the limits of constitutions
rights and privileges We mean to act IL
accordance with the laws, and believe thai
va are right, and that the people will sus
tain Us"
In this Mr.iWallace is right the peo-
pie do,and will sustain the majority IN thi
action, and the knowledge of this fact i
what has maddened the republicans. The,
love their fraudulent president just wei
enough to urge him to interpose his vet
to cover up their blunder in opposing tn
political Legislation of the bill, and thereb
sacrifice himself to save the party. Shout
he do this, he will show himself yer
poor student of political history as we'll q
stultify his own action when he was
member of congress from Ohio. Instance
are rare where an executive of law ha
ever successfully quarrelled with the Law
making power, especially when il is tn
representative of clear and positive ma
jority of the people, aud sustained by tn
cool judgment of the respectable portion
the minority as we'll, Mr.. Hayes wi
be unfortunate if he is coerced into pal
taking of the madness which is fast d,
stroying disparity.