Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1879-04-23

any IrOOpS VI drmeu mon al any plaCe "nero
a general or special election is held in any
State, unless such force be necessary to repel
armed enemies of the United States, or to
keep peace at the polls, shall be fined not
more than five thousand dollars and suffer
imprisonment at hard labor not less
than three months nor more than FIVE years
These sections, though widely separated IN
the revision of the statutes, are parts OF the
general laws passed the fifteenth of February.
1865, 10 prevent officers OF the army and
navy and other persons engaged in the ser
vice from interfering in elections IN the States.
(l3 Statutes at Large, page 437.) The hrst
section denounced the use of troops at cleo
tions, except In two specified cases, and the
second section provided penalties for disobe-
dlence. The two excepted cases are where
troops were necessary to repel armed enemies
of the United States or to keep the peace at
the POLLS The sixth section of the appro-
priation bill proposes to strike from both sec
tions the words or to keep the peace at the
polls, aud nothing more; so that the army
cam o. be used hereafter at elections for any
purpose. As an abstract proposition, could
there be any rational objection to this?
Ought the army to be used at the polls when
tnere has been profound peace for more than
a decade? Does any one believe that such
law would ever have received the approval of
the American congress if it had been brought
forward in time of peace? 1t was passed
when formidable civil war was IN progress,
taxing to the utmost the resources of the
In the opinion of the patriots
of that day the state of feeling
in certain parts of the country was of such
character as to endanger peaceful elections
while the war lasted. unless a mighty force
was kept In readiness Tor any outbreak OF
popular commotion. This was the conviction
that prompted the legislation, but l venture
to say no one of the eminent men who voted
for it intended or expected that 1t would re-
main a part of the permanent law OF the
land. They were too well read In lessons OF
history and the traditions OF the Anglo-Saxon
race to believe that a free people would toler-
ate, except in great emergencies like
war waged for the maintenance of the Union,
the interference OF the military in civil con-
Germs, and they were men of principle and
did not wish it to be otherwise. 1t Is no new
thing in time of peace to repeal a law passed
in time of war; indeed no wise statesman
will hesitate to do it if the la be unsuitable
to their changed condition of things. 1t Is
part Of the very nature Of every man of our
race to rebel against anything which inter-
feres with the freedom of elections, and the
DAYS of the republic are numbered If the
people ever consent to place the ballot box
under the protection OF the bayonet. But,
Mr.. President, this consent will never be OBJ
tai Ied until they have forgotten the prlnci-
pies of constitutional liberty and the prece-
dents set by the commons of England. Can
1t be possible that a principle OF common
law, right of the people to have an
election free from the presence of troops,
SO dear to Englishmen hundred years ago,
is not equally as dear to their descendants at
the present day? Mr.. President, it will re-
ouire some one now living to write accurately
the history of these times, for the future his
torian will be slow to believe that there was
any basis on which to rest such an inquiry in
the congress of the United States during the
latter part of the nineteenth century. Why,
then, should not the law of 1865 be altered
in the manner proposed by this billf 1t Is
said that President Lincoln signed it, and the
inference Is that it would reflect on his mem
DRY to change it. To say the least, this is a
pretty strong presumption from such a predi-
cate. No man loved Mr.. Lincoln better or
honors his memory more than | do, nor had
any one greater opportunities to learn the
constitution of his mind and the character of
his habits Of thought. He was large hearted
and wiser than those associated with him,
full OF sympathy for struggling humanity,
without malice and with charity for erring
man, loving his whole country with a deep
devotion and intensity, and anxious to save it.
Believing, as do, that he was raised up by
Providence for the great crisis of the war of
the rebellion, l have equal faith that, had he
lived, we would have been spared much of
the strife of these latter days, and
that we would low be on the high
road to prosperity. Such a man, hating
all rms of oppression, and deeply Imbued
with the principle that induced the men of
I776 to resist the stamp-tax, would never
have willingly intrusted power to any one,
unless war was fragrant, to send troops
to oversee an election. Why, then,
repeat, should not the proposed measure
pass? There is no Rebellion, nor is there any
threatened, nor is there any domestic up
roar anywhere. The Union Is cemented by
blood that was shed in defense of its integri-
ty The laws are obeyed north and south.
east and west. and our only differences relate
to the administration of the internal affairs
CT the Governm mt. By the construction of
the human mind there will, of necessity, be
a diversity of opinion among the people as to
the best way to manage their internal at
fairs, and congress meets periodically to leg
islate for the people, and to represent their
Yievs on questions dividing them. But,
surely, these differences, whether they be
great or small, afford NJ justification for a
departure from any of the principles which
underlie tins republican government. Ii
they do, the charter of our liberties will soon
be FILTERED away. The charge that this is
revolutionary legislation has no force. 1t
might be called a partisan devise. Congress
has power under the constitution to raise and
equip aFmies, and the house OF representatives
holds the purse strIrgs. n the pending
army bill nothing is proposed but to strike
out the single clause forbidding the pres
ence Of troops at the polls. In no respect is
the authority of the President to answer a
call 10 70 eli an invasion or to suppress an in
surrection in any way abrid led, The amend
nent is germane to the bin, and is simply a
condition as to the use of the army, which
the peoples representatives had perfect
right to impose. 1t is not in any proper
sense general legislation, and if it was tbs
statute books are full of presidents that the
friends of the measure might cite against
the1s opponents. Whether the clause In
question ought to be repealed is a fair subjec
for discussion. But the form of presenting il
Is not liable to just criticism. Personally
/ should have preferred to vote on the propo-
sluon as an independent bull, because the prac
tiGe of both parties placing legislation On ap
| preparation pills is mora tc be 'hGnored ip tht
| breach than IN the observance. If this course
had been pursued, it is probable the whole de-
| bate would have been less acrimonious anC
| the excitement which has followed 1T coulC
never have been worked up to so high pitch
! 1t has been alleged that there Is an at
4 tempt to coerce the Executive in thi
bill. Certainly none appears on the surface
aud he is left entirely free to exercise hi
own Judgment, If it should be sent to him IL
! its present or IN modified forna. 70 assum
| CoaJ ne Will approve or Will veto, or TO lnCrO
duce him in any way into this debate, is
departure from a wise usage. The Presi
! dents sphere of action is defined by the con
stitution, and any attempt to influence legis
| l9tion by suggestions of what he may, or ma
! not, DO, is an obtrusion deserving rebuke
| 1t will be tipe enough e aritieiss the actiol
of the President when be shalt haye exercised
bis stitutioual right, and any discussion
of hIs supposed course before then is who'll
out OF place IN this body. Let us hope, MI
President, when this bill has passed from GU
hands, that the angry debate which has at
tended it will operate as electricity does i
purifying the air, and that all will come to
gether better disposed to give the countr
What has been given to party-a unite
| effort to provide relief for the prevailing dis
igess in e. elg pgrcgi5 of life,
Senator Logan said that hs understood hi
colleague to remark that the laws wer
obeyed alike IN the north and south.
Senator Davis-I meant Federal laws.
Senator Logan differed from his colleague
end then referred to the annual repor
or the ooE.rissioner of internal revenue fc
the year 1873 to show very large numbe
| of violations of the internal revenue laws /