River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1879-05-08


emption from discrimination in the exercise of
the elective franchise on account of race, color,
or previous condition of servitude. The power
of Congress to protect the right by appropriate
legislation is expressly affirmed by the court,
National legislation to provide safeguards for
free and honest election is necessary, as ex-
perience has shown. not only to secure the right |
for all 10 the enfranchised race at the South,
but also to prevent fraudulent voting in large t
cities of the North. Congress has therefore I
exercised the power conferred by the constitu- /
ton, and has enacted certain laws to prevent |
discrimination account of race, color, or |
previous condition of servitude, and to punish |
FRAUD, VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION
at federal elections. Attention is called to the |
following section of the revised statutes of |
the United States. VIZ: Section 1904, which |
guarantees all citizen the right TO vote with
out distinction on account of race, color. or /
previous condition of servitude; sections zoos |
and 20e6, which guarantees to all citizens equal
opportunity, without discrimination, to per- |
form all acts required by law as prerequisite |
or qualification for voting: section 2020 which |
authorizes the United States marshal and his |
deputies to keep the peace and preserve order |
at general elections; section 2O24 which ex- |
pressly authorizes the United States marshal |
and his deputies TO summon posse commitatus |
whenever they any of them are forcibly re- |
sisted In the execution of their duties under |
the law, and are prevented from executing their
vides for the punishment of the crime of inter-
fering with supervisors of elections ID deputy
marshals in the discharge of duties at elections
of Representatives in Congress. These are
some of the laws this subject which 1t is
the duty of the executive 20 enforce. The
ISTEST AND EFFECT
of the sixth section of this bill is to prohibit
all civil officers OF the United States, under a
penalty of fine and imprisonment. from en-
pIoying any adequate civil force for this pur-
pose at places where their enforcement is most
| necessary, namely the places where Congress
sioual elections are held. Among the most
valuable enactments to which l have referred
are those which protect the supervisors of fed
eral elections in the discharge of their duties at
| the polls. If the pending legislation should
| become law there is power vested in any
officer of the government to protect from VIE
lence the officers of the United States engaged
in the discharge of their duty. Their rights
and duties under the law will remain, but the
national government will be powerless to en-
force it's own statutes. The State may employ
| both the military and civil powers to keep the
! peace and enforce the laws at State elections.
| 1t is now proposed to deny to the United States
| even the necessary civil authority to protect
| a national election. No sufficient reason has
been given for this discrimination in favor of
| the State and against the national authority.
| Ii we'll founded objections exist against the
present national election laws, all good citizens
should unite in their amendment. Laws pro-
viding safeguards of election should be
IMPARTIAL, JUST AND EFFICIENT.
They should if possible, be non partisan
and fair in their operation that the minority
party out of power will have no Just grounds to
complain. The present laws have in practice
unquestionably conduced to the prevention of
fraud and violence at elections. In several OF
the States members of different political par
ties have applied for safeguards which they fur
nlsh. 1t is the right and duty of the national
government to enact and enforce laws which
will secure free and fair congressional elections
The laws in force should not be repealed
| except in connection with the enactment of
| measures which will better accomplish that
important end. Believing that section six of
| the bill before me will weaken, if it does not
altogether take away the power of the national
government to protect federal elections, by the
| civil authorities | am forced to the conclusion
! that it ought
NOT TO RECEIVE MY APPROVAL.
That section is, however, not presented to
me as a separate and independent measure
| but has been stated it is attached 20 the
| election laws of the country, which is in no way
| connected with the of the army. 1t pro-
| hibits under heavy penalties any person en-
| gagged in the civil service of the United States
from having any force at the place OF any cleo
| ton prepared to keep order, to make arrests
| to keep the peace, in any manner to en-
force the laws. This is altogether
FOREIGN TO THE PURPOSE
| of an army appropriation bill. The practice of
lacking to army appropriation bills measures
not pertinent to such bills did not prevail I'M
til more than forty years after the adoption of
| the constitution. 1t has become the common
practice, and all parties, when in power, have
| adopted it. Many abuses and great waste of
public money have in this way crept into APP
preparation bills. The public opinion of the
country is against it. The States which have
recently adopted constitutions, have generally
provided
REMEDY FOR THE EVIL
| by electing that no law shall contain more than
one subject, which shall be plainly expressed in
its title. The constitutions of more than half
the States contain substantially this provision.
| The public welfare will be promoted in many
ways by return to the early practice of the
| government and to the true principle of legis-
| latiou, which requires that every measure shall
stand or fall according to it's own merits. If
| it were understood that to attach to an appro-
priation bill measure irrelevant to the general
object of the bill would imperil and probably
prevent its final passage and approval, an
INVALUABLE REFORM
/ in the parliamentary practice of Congress
would be accomplished. The best justification
| that has been offered FOR attaching irrelevant
riders to appropriation bills, is that it is done
| for convenience sake. to facilitate the passage
of measures which are deemed expedient by all
| branches of the governn ent which participate
| in legislation. 1t cannot be claimed that there
is any such reason for attaching this amend
ment of election laws to army appro priation
bills. The history of the measure contradicts
this assumption. majority of the House of
Representatives in the last Congress was n ia
vor of the sixth section to this bill, 1t was
known that majority of the Senate was OPP
posed to it, and that as a separate measure it
could not be adopted. 1t was attached TO the
army appropriation bill to
COMPEL THE SENATE
to assent to it 1t was plainly announced to
the Senate the army bill would not be allowed
to pass unless the proposed amendments to the
election laws adopted with it. The Senate
refused to scent TO the bill on account of this
irrelevant section. Congress thereupon adj
journed without passing the appropriation
bill for the army, and the present extra session
of the Forty-sixth Congress became necessary
to furnish the means to carry on the govern
ment. The ground upon which the action of the
House of Representatives is defended has been
distinctly stated by man, many of -. its a ao
of the last session of Congress the doctrine in |
question was stated by one of its ablest de- I
fenders as follows: 1T is duty to repeal I
this Law. 1t is not worth while to attempt |
repeal except upon an appropriation bill The I
Republican Senate would not agree to nor the +
Republican President sign the bill for such /
repeal. Whatever objection to legislation upon I
appropriation bills may be made in ordinary I
cases, does not apply where free elections and |
The liberty of citizens are concerned. we nave I
the power to vote money, let as annex condi- /
tions to it, and insist upon redress of the
grievances"
BY another distinguished member Of the /
House it was said the right of the represents
tives of the people to
WITHHOLD SUPPLIES
is as old as English liberty. History records I
numerous instances where the commons feel I
ing that the people were oppressed by laws that
the lords would not consent to repeal by ordi-
nary means of legislation, obtained redress at
last by refusing appropriations unless accom-
panied by the relief measures. That question, /
of the gravest magnitude, and new in this
country, raised by this course of proceed
ing 1t fully recognized also by its de-
tenders in the Senate. 1t was said by distin-
guished Senator, Perhaps
no GRAvER QUESTION
In the form we are brought to consider it was
ever considered by the American Congress in
time of peace, for it involves not only the
merits and dement's of the laws which the
House bill proposes to repeal, but involves the
rights, the privileges, the powers and the du-
ties of the two branches of Congress and of
the President of the United States. 1t is
question whose importance can scarcely be
estima ed. II is a question that never yet has
been brought 50 sharply before the American
Congress and the American people as it may
be now. It is a question which sooner or later
must be decided, and the decision must deter
mine what are the powers of the House of Rep
resentatives
UNDER THE CONSTITUTIONS
nv President / shonfd annroach this o,fsefinu