The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1879-09-10

Southern States" and is as non-mettled as
Zach Chandler. But whether he would or
not the question. The question is whether
any president can constitutionally be given,
Keep the peace at the polls. or to. in any way.
intermeddle with State elections?
Mr.. sherman does not attempt TO justify the
marshals and supervisors law as either cpnsti-
tutfonal or expedient. Its unconstitutionality
is demonstrable to any man of common intel
the constitution was framed the whole con-
troll of elections of members of Congress was
power to alter the State regulations as to the
time. places and manner of holding such cleo
tons because it was Thought probable that it
ment to have those elections all on one day or
to have them held In single districts. Then 1t
was suggested, at the very close of debate,
that possibly some States might refuse alto
gether to elect members of Congress; and I'm
make all necessary provisions for electing
members of Congress in such States. Solely 10
provide ior OLD, nnls conaangnncy, as M Madison
aSection {. The times, places and manner
of holding elections for senators and repre-
sentatives shall be prescribed in each State by
the Legislature thereof, but the Congress may
at any time by law make or alter such regaIa-
tions, except as to the places of choosing sena-
tors ("
provides that every white male citizen of the
United States of the age OF q years. who shall
nave Oeen a resident OF the state one wear
next preceding the election and of the county,
township or ward in which he resides such
time may be provided by law, shall have
to vote a all elections"
Here is the election law of the State provid-
ing for the election of members of Congress
and other officers. 1t PROVIDE how long a per-
son must be a resident of the county, township
right to vote Il provides how persons may
gain or lose a residence. and what facts shall
determine q residence; it provides for dividing
ha init
ballot-boxes. fixing places of election, selecting
judges ON residents OF the election precincts,
ing the elections, and of making returns and
proclaiming results. All the officers SO author
lied to conduct elections are State officers.
They derive their authoriety under aud are
sworn to obey the State constitution and law.
conduct these elections, or denies that this
whole election machinery, thus conducted and
managed by State officers, is valid and in full
force ana Op ration.
But the Republican party, by its Federal
election law, has provided that two Federal
supervisors may be appointed at each one of
these election precincts, with power to in
spect tse ballots of electors and determine
what votes shall be received and what votes
rejected; and If any State election officer re-
fuses to subm his judgment to that of the
Federal sur ervisors the supervisors may seize
such election officer and drag him from the
balIot-box to Federal prison, to be indicted
and tried for the felony Of disobedience to these
lenged, and the State judges, in obedience to a
State law, determine, on the facts presented,
visor may seize the elector before his ballot is
put in and drag him off 10 Federal prison,
although the power to define qualifications of
electors. and, consequently. to provide for the
method in which right TO vote may be deter
mined. is, by the constitution of The United
States, expressly reserved to the States, abso-
iuteIy and Internationally.
Now, l believe there is not a lawyer OF fair
standing in OHIO who will risk his reputation
on an opinion that the Federal Government
has any power to thus prevent an elector from
voting, or in any manner supervise, control
or direct or NEEDLE with the State election
officers while conducting a Congressional
election under this State law. Such inter-
ference is organized anarchy. No officer OF
State Government can lawfully be directed or
controlled by a Federal officer in the perform
ance of his duties under valid state laws, for
each Government is supreme in its sphere as
defined by the constitution OF the United
States. This Federal election law is, therefore,
utterly and obviously Unconstitutional.
Mr.. sherman makes faint attempt to justf-
fy the Republican party in enacting this law
by claiming that there were 10000 illegal
votes cast in the City OF New York in 1855; but
the law to have been wise one, Tor he Knows
that wherever its power has been invoked the
deputies employed and paid out OF the public
treasury nave been largely poor Democrats,
tribed 10 desert their party for IS day, and
still more largely the most despicable scoun-
drels that could be raket from the hells of the
big cities. The law has demonstrated itself
every where to be the basest and corruptest
instrument OF partisanship ever seized upon
| to stay the downfall of party in power.
Dodging the question of The constitutional
| ity and expediency OF the law, MT. sherman
refused appropriations of money to hire these
spies and marsnals to intermeddle with State
elections. He says the withholding of public
mouey for this purpose is more dangerous
opposition than the attempted notification of
| the tariff laws by South Carolina, put down by
General Jackson, or even the attempted seces-
sion put down by civil war. By this doctrine
the refusal OF q majority of either House to
obey the law" He seems particularly sorry
to ind General Rice and myself, after our
honorable record during the war;" in
this terrible atti ude OF notification and re-
bellion. .If they were right during the war,
they are wrong now. have no disposition to
criticise them or arraign them. but prefer 20
follow the old Republican flag that was hoisted
In the midst OF your patriotic peroration, to
call your attention to the fact that in follow
ing the Republican flag in 1856 you. yourself,
offered an amendment TO the army appropria-
ton bill to the effect that part OF the milf
tary force of the United States herein provided
for shall be employed in aid of the enforce
ment of the ensctments of the alleged Legisla-
tive Assembly OF the Territory OF Kansas"
adopted: and further, because the Senate
refused to concur in your amendment,
journment of the first session of the
Thirty -fourth Congress, leaving the army
snd farIer that When the caed
Congress together again you voted TO adhere to
your amendment. and undertook TO force an
adjournment of the second session without
permitting the passage OF the army appropria-
ton bill, but were overruled by few Of your
conservative Republican colleagues Joining
the Democrats and saving the army from dis
bandment for want OF an appropriation.
The difference between your position then
and now is this: Then you were struggling
against a bad use of Federal troops in a terri
tory over which the Federal Government had
supreme control: and now you are struggling
for bad use of Federal troops and marshals
to control state elections, with which the Fed
eral Government has nothing whatever to do.
You were willing to disband the whole army
then rather than suffer the Federal Govern
ment to exercise its undoubted powers; and
now you denounce as rebels and nullifers men
who served through the war for the Union,
while you prospered in peace and comfort at
paid from the common treasury OF the people
to wrest from them the control of their ballot
box.
/ am not disposed, my fellow-citizens, to