Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1879-04-16
WRITER'S AND WALLACE.

Speeches in the Senate In Reply to the
misrepresentation and False Assump-
Z tions of Blaine-The Real Objects of the
Democracy In the Pending Legislation
The Rights of the Legislative. and Exec
utive Arms of the Government Ju-
tlicially Reviewed.
Below we give telsgraphic abstracts of the
remarks of Senators Withers and Wallace,
made in the United States Senate Monday,
in reply to the speech of Senator Blaine,
crowded out of our issue of yesterday by the
great press of matter upon our columns. We
commend q careful perusal of these remarks
to every person as clear exposition of the
patriotic purpose of the Democracy in the
pending legislation in Congress:
Mr.. Withers said the statement of the
in the States east of Missouri, was q futile
attempt to divert attention from the facts
lying at the foundation of our institutions.
Such remarks as those of the Senator would
not produce much effect either upon the
Senate or the country. It was not ques-
ton to be decided whether there were SOL
diers enough to dominate and control the
elections, but whether under the operation
of existing laws, it was not possible for the
executive to distribute and use the soldiery
80 as to destroy the freedom of elections.
The Senator from Maine stated that the is
sue the Democrats made was false, SANDER
GUS and scandalous. Without pausing to
criticise the peculiar expressions which the
Senator had thought proper to use, he
(Withers) would simply say that it was no
false issue when they proposed to repeal
law allowing troops to be used in elections,
guarded only by their commander. It was
no false issue to say there could be no free
election in the presence of troops, and they
had no right to say how men should vote.
The preservation of peace at the polls should
be left to the control of the States, where the
constitution left it. The points made by
the Senator from Maine were simply ON
bill not now before the Senate. No one on
the Democratic side, so far as he knew,
had ever laid down the proposition
that the President should not exercise his
constitutional power to veto bill. The SEN
ator from Maine said the course of the Dem
ocrats was the audacity of revolution; but
how could this be when the Democrats sim
ply proposed to make the appropriations for
the support of the army with condition as
to the use of the troops annexed2 This was
clearly in the power of the House and the
Senate to approve. Here the agency of Con-
gress ended. The Democrats did not pro-
pose to shape their course as to what may or
may not be the position of the President. He
should not attempt to take away particle
of the spinal marrow attempted to be given
to the President by the Senator from Maine.
He would not interfere with any agency to
| i,,e,, ,k, al Ill II
Mr.. Wallace, in reply to Blaine, said that
this bill came from committee. It did not
come from secret consultation of Demo-
Gratis. He spoke thus clearly because he
was one of the members of the committee.
He would not now occupy the floor if he
had not been charged by the committee to
give the reasons for the insertion of the sec
ton of the bill disputed by the Senator from
Maine. The bill came here from the House,
and was taken to the clerks desk and thence
| was taken to the committee on appropria-
tions. It had been reported back from that
committee. This was the very bill, almost
in word and letter, that was reported by the
committee of conference during the last ses-
| sion, and would have been agreed to by the
two Houses and passed but for their disa-
greement on the amendments. The bill was
now here on its passage. It contained a
single disputed section to which
he would now address himself. The war
caused many departures from principles
which were essential to our liberties. Ne
cessity made the people bear the subsection
of the civil to military authority, the suspen-
sion of habeas carpus, and the presence of
armed troops at the polls. These pass away
with the necessity that produced them. The
single issue in this bill is, shall the executive
longer possess the power to pl.ce troops at
the polls Their presence was a menace to
the right of free elections. This right is free
and certain. It came to US from England,
and is part of our system of laws. Its
protection rests in States. The federal gov
said Wallace, the only issue in contest. We
will not be diverted from it. On this line
we stand by it we fall. It is whether the
federal government shall place troops
at the polls, or whether the States,
free from federal interference, shall
preserve the peace and secure free elections.
repeat, the placing of troops at the polls is
q menace, a threat, and no free people can
bear it. In the bill of rights of nearly every
State free elections are guaranteed, while no
such power is given to the federal govern
ment anywhere in the constitution. The
statutes of many States assert and protect
this right. In 1903 Pennsylvania asserted il
by statute. New York, Maryland and many
others have like provisions. No attemp.
was made by the federal government until il
was exercised in the border States under the
war power. The exercise of this power was
force alone. It became oppression, and IL
1864 Senator Powell, of Kentucky, intro
duced the act of 1865. As introduced i
gave no power to interfere with elections
but was restrictive. of evil. The judiciar,
committee reported against the bill. On it
passage Senator Pomeroy, of Kansas, in
serted the words giving the troop
power to keep peace at tn.
polls. Every Republican voted fo
this and every Democrat against it. Troop
at the polls and free elections are incompati
BILE. Power by law to the executive of
State or republic to place troops at the poll
is negation of the system. We propose
} Mr.. Wallace said, to maintain the American
. system of free elections; to restore to civi
! power all control over the machinery of gov
eminent. A free system of laws cannot tol
crate even the possible use of force at tn
foundation of power. Why shall We not re
store this right? No Senator will deny tn
) right or it's value; none assert that troop
: under partisan control conduce to free elee
tions. The legislation of 1864 was the frs
instance Of the mail-cl hand of the feeders
. government at the ballot-box.
! Mr.. Blaine Gnterrupting)-D the Sens
tor present the idea that the amendment
, put on by Republican Senators refer to ii
. control Of elections in Kentucky, where th
Democrats had the right to vote, or will
!, accept the suggestion that it was to kee
rebel Kentuckians from coming back to con
, troll the elections, or we're they Democrat
: voters, who fought against the Union undo
D JEFF Davis and came back to defeat Unio
}, voters?
Mr.. Wallace Iesuming) said the Senate
: from Maine has injected into my remarl
. the assertion that federal power was WI
l power. Mr.. Wallace said the people wal
: free elections without the shadow or sui
!, stance of military power, whether State
> federal. He wanted the provisions of IL
i constitution to be the law OF the land. ]
{ the name of the people, he in part represen
o ed, he asked that this menace be remove,
I. and that the State have control of the prese
d walton of the peace at the polls, as they shou
Jo.,o~. ;,, y,<,<,, 1own <rod1ov Mo-soo WI.