Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1879-05-09
SENATOR ooNKL1Ngs SPEECH ON
THE ARMY BILL.

| fraction were collected under the tariff laws
by lcvying duties on imported merchandise,
and 100000, 600 and fraction on American
production. OF this total 1926, 1000, 900 I'm
! round numbers the twenty-seven States who
had adhered to the Union during the feCent
war paid S22l, ,20l, POS. The residue same
from the eleven States namely, Alabama,
Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, Mis-
sissippi, North Carolina, South Carolina; Ten
nessee, Texas and Virginia. These eleven
! States paid Sl3,02T, 192 Uf this sum more
than So, 100000 came from the tobacco OF Vir-
ginia; deducting the latter sum from the
| former, and the eleven States paid 81, 1876 4G2.
| This great sum was collected under the law.
The Constitution requires all bills for rails
| ing revenue to originate In the HOtse OF
Representatives. They are not recent laws,
and they have been approved and affirmed
| by succeeding Houses and the last two
! cr.AIc Speaker. The bills were reported by
Democratio committees er,I pussuu ny narno
cratic ,n@Iorities. Both Houses are now Dem
ucratic, aud we hear of no purpose to repeal
or suspend the existing royehu6 laws. They
are to remain and continue to operate and
take the tribute ot the people. IL the sum
stated is to be less thai It was last year, It
will be only beeause the tbbatc6 tax has been
reduced THIS vast revenue is paid for three
uses. 1t is supplied in a time of great depres-
sion and distress to pay debt in which we
| have been involved by the Rebellion; to pay
the pensions OF widows and orphans and of
cripples made by the rebellion, and to main
tain the Government, preserved at an expense
not to be estimated of life and treasure. To
exact money, and then forbid the use for
which the people paid IL, would indeed be
perhdious and abomnable There was only
one mode in which 1t could reach such uses,
and that Is an appropriation by law. The
Constitution sb urdaihs. The Constitution
permits NO discretion to a majority or to a
| Congress, whether it make the needful ap-
preparations or not. The Constitution,
| however, does commit to Congress the dis
cretion TO ascertain how much money is
needed, but that done, the command to
| appropriate is positive and absolute. The
| command to make the appropriation Is
| plain and peremptory, and a refusal to do so
| is revolutionary and reasonable. SO, too,
when the Constitution invests Congress with
the power to provide money to pay debts and
| prOVlde Tor common defense and general vel
| tare' the plain meaning is that CUngress shall
| do this thing, and refusal to do this is DISC
bediente to the Constitution and subversive
| OF 1t. IL the members of the Judiciary and
| Executive departments failed to do their du-
| ties under the Constitution they would be
| liable TO impeachment If the members of the
legislative branch were likewise amenabe to
| punishment for dereliction of duty, it would
| be broader, If not less guilty act, to violate
| their exalted trusts. In ordinary times tru-
| isms like these would be needless, If not out
of place, in the Senate, They are pertinent
now only because an occasion has arisen un-
paralleled In American history, and, so far as
| he knew, in British history. IL precedent
could be found it should not be in country
| possessing written Constitution, plainly de-
fining the rights of all living under it. II was
| not to transplant but to leave behind the ira
ditons of the struggle between the subject
and the rulers that our fathers fled to these
| Shores IL was to render impossible here
the caste distinctions of an ill-adjusted
society. The partisan spirit animating
this debate, If 1T was anywhere mis-
understood, was mistaken especially in
| this body. To hear what was called the de-
bates on this subject One would think that
the majority were arraigned simply because
| they were acting unconstitutionally in put
ting legislation on appropriation bills. This was
not the case. For himself he knew of no bet
ter reasons than convenience, common sense
4 and the danger of log g-rolling combinations to
forbid putting all appropriations on a single
bill A bill embracing such huddle of In
| congruous provisions, If no objection to its
separate parts was found, it was difficult to
| see on what ground vote could stand. But
the objection to this legislation would be as
strong If it had taken the form of indepen-
dent bills. A resort to separate bills might
even have cloaked the sinister design of the
| legislation, and in that view would have been
wise policy for the other side. In the case
| pending the face of the bill itself shows that
the legislation is not such that the Executive
| can rightly approve. 1t shows the design to
| be to coerce the Executive into violating
his sense of right, in order to permit the
Government to live. Thus far the achieve
ments of the Democratic majority had been
easy, but the trial was yet to come. 1t would
be more difficult. The party had got them.
selves into apredicament, and unless theExecu'
tive led them out, they would have to look out.
They had been told that il the President re-
fused to accept these bills, with all their po-
litical excrescences and yield to majority they
will vacate their seats and leave the Govern
ment moneyless. If the majority should
make such attempt, he (Conklng) hoped and
trusted they would be called back as soon as
need be, until they relinquished their mon
| strous pretension and abandoned their treas
enable position. The Army bill was not the
same bill, In some OF its features, that was
presented as the ultimatum of the Democratic
party few days ago. The pending bill con,
demned its predecessor. 1t had been found
that the bill needed alteration. It did
need it badly. The bill of the last session
lacked prOviso. A proviso now came TO save
the right of the President to aid State in
the contingency contemplated by the Con-
stitution. Without this proviso, as the bill
was previously presented, 1t would punish the
President and the General OF the army, and
others whom it might concern, for obeying
the Constitution of the United States and
two acts of Congress, one of which was
signed by George Washington. Shom OF
its absurdity, If the bill became a law it would
be the first statute of the kind found on the
statute books of the United States A cen
tury, with all its action and party strife and
passionate discord and wisdom and fOlly,with
all its patriotism and treason, had never YET
produced majority who believed that such
statute was fit to be enacted.
The effect OF this bill is to prevent the sup
preston of any violence by any armed mar
acting under National authority upon elcc
tion day. In New York every thug, shoulder
hitter, carrier of dirk or bowie knife, every
graduate of the ratpits, bucket-shops anC
sums, the nursery of what is nowadays called
the Democracy, and every man from King,
Bridge to the Battery is advised beforehand
that no enormity of his will be checked by the
law officers of the Government. Another bill
to be brought forward provides that even i
the elections are turned into bloody bur
lesques, the National authority must keel
away though White Leaguers may take al
active part, armed, perhaps, with muskets fur
nished by the Government, IL there ever wa
a time when such a law would be safe tina
time is not now. The Constitution says tina
Congress shall have power to provide for call
ing forth the militia to execute the laws o
the Union. Speaking TO lawyers, he wsheC
to emphasize the word execute" 1t had
deep legal significance. 1t warranted the US
OF the armyS
Mr.. Conkling asked his friend from Kansa
Ungalls) to read for him a section of tn
, Revised Statutes passed in pursuance of an,
to put into effect this Constitutional pro
2 vision.
Mr., Conkling resumed his Constitutions
argument 20 show the authority of tn
United States to use troops to preserve peace
The law proposed TO be repealed, he said, di
: not contain any authority for single soldier
or armed man, to approach the polls, Its pre-
visions were directed to the use of troops onl
e as an organized peace cepreservlng body. Tn
n power of the President In this matter wa
. vested in the Constitution and the act of 179i
Z and until 1865 this had been deemed sufficen
! authority. The question of the extent q
: National authority rests somewhat on th
locus, to use a legal term. In a navy-yard q
g other place wholly under United States jurli
Sse use troops G TO keen the IN peace llc could never
questioned. Under the act protecting ele'
tions which gave the United States iurisdictio
It in Congressional elections, the right 10 enforc
!. the jurisdiction was also conferred. Up
~ this Constitutional right In 1851 Gener
y | Qnhnnnl. 49, l....nrnla laallnl orlnl