Daily globe., 1879-04-23


represent the wishes or opinions of the masses
of the people of either section. Experience
has taught them that legitimate business prin-
ciples which lead to wealth and happiness, re-
quire cessation from agitation of the past,
and that sound policy dictates the cultivation of
PEACE AND GOOD WILL
between the sections. The country, Mr.. Presi-
dent, cannot be prosperous SO long as the con-
hict between the North and South is used at
each recurring Presidential election an in
strumentality of party vices, and the states
man who shall rise equal to the occasion and
put it at rest will receive the gratitude of a
suffering people. The bill before US is for the
support of the army for the ensuing fiscal
year. It is attacked because the sixth section
affairs two provisions of the revised statutes.
Section 2,002 of these statutes
READS AS FOLLOWS:
mo military or naval officer or other person
engaged in the civil, military or naval services
of the United States shall order, bring, keep or
have under his authority or control any troops
or armed men at the place where any general
or special election is held, in any State, unless
it be necessary to repel armed enemies of tho
United States or to keep peace at the polls, :"
and section 1928 is in thess words: Every officer
OF the army or navy. or other person IN + the
civil. military or naval service of the United
States, who orders, brings, keeps, or has under
his authority or control any troops or armed
men at any place where general or special
election is held in any State, unless such force
be Necessary to repel the armed enemies of the
United States or to keep peace at the polls,
shall be fined not more than S5, 600, and suffer
imprisonment at hard labor not less than three
months nor more than five years."
THE QUESTION AT ISSUE.
These sections, though widely separated in the
revised statutes, are parts of general law
passed on the 25th of February. 1865, to pre-
persons engaged in the service. from interfer-
ing in elections in States, 13 statutes at large,
page 437. The first section denounced the use
of troops at elections, except in two specified
cases, and the second section provided penalties
for disobedience. The two excepted cases are
when troops were necessary to repel armed ene-
mics of the United States or to keep peace at
the polls. The sixth section of the appropria-
tion bill proposes to strike from both sections
the words 'or to keep peace at the polls,
and nothing more, so that the army cannot 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 there has been pro-
found 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 a
time of peace2 It was passed when formid-
able civil war was in progress, taxing to the ut
most the resources of the country. In the opin-
ion of the patriots of that day the state of
feeling in certain parts of the country was of
such character as to en- danger
PEACEFUL ELECTIONS
while the war lasted, unless mighty force was
kept in readiness for any outbreak of popular
commotlon. This was the conviction that
prompted the legislation, but venture to say
one of the eminent men who voted for it,
intended or expected it would remain part of
the permanent laws of the land. They were
too we'll read in lessons of history and the ira
ditions of the Anglo-Saxon race, to believe a
free people would tolerate, except in great
emergencies like war waged for the mainten-
ance of the Union. the
INTERFERENCE OF THE MILITARY IN CIVIL
CONCERNS,
and they were men of principle and did not
wish it to be otherwise. It is no new thing in
time of peace to repeal law passed in time of
war. Indeed no wise statesman will hesitate
to do SO if the law be unsuitable to the chang
ed condition of things. 1t is part of the very
nature of every man of our race to rebel
against anything which interferes with the
freedom of elections, and the days of tho
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
tanned until they have forgotten the principles
of constitutional liberty, and the precedentl
set by the commons of England. Can it be
possible that q principle of common law,
| right Of the people to have an election free
from the presence of troops, so dear to English
| men 100 years ago, is not equally dear to thei
descendants at present.
| Mr.. President, it will require some one nov
| living to write accurately the history of thes'
! times, for the future historian will be slow tt
| believe that there was any basis on which t.
rest such an inquiry in the Congress of the
United States during the latter part of the
nineteeth century. Why then should not
THE LAW OF 1865 BE ALTERED
in the manner proposed by this bill? 1t i
said that President Lincoln signed, and the in
ference is that it would reflect on his memor,
to change it. To say the least, this is prett,
strong presumption from such a predicate
No man loved Mr.. Lincoln better or honor
his memory more than I do, nor had any on
greater opportunities to learn the constitution
of his mind and character of his habits o
thought. He was large hearted, wiser thai
those associated with him, full of sympath,
for struggling humanity, without malice will
charity for erring men, loving his whole coun
try with deep devotion, and intensely anxious
to save it. Believing as do, that
| HE WAS RAISED UP BY PROVIDENCE
for the great crisis of the war of the rebellion
have an equal belief that had he lived ",
would have been spared much of the strife o
! these latter days and that we would be on tn
| high road to prosperity. Such man, hatin,
| all forms of oppression and deeply imbuec
with the principle which induced the men O
| l776 to resist the stamp act, would never hav
willingly intrusted power to any one, unles
| fn 10
election. Why, then, repeat, should not tn
proposed measure pass. There is no rebellion
nor any threatened, nor any domestic uproa
| anywhere,
THE UNION Is CEMENTED BY TIE BLOOD
that was shed in defense of its integrity. Th
laws are obeyed North and South, East ant
West, and our only real differences relate t.
the administration of internal affairs of tn,
government. By the construction of the hu
man mind there will be of necessity divers
| opinions among the people, on the best way t,
manage their internal affairs, and Congress
| meets periodically to legislate for the people
and to represent their views on questions di
viding them, but surely these differences, b
| they great or small, afford no justification fo
a departure from any of the
| PRINCIPLES THAT UNDERLIE REPUBLICAN GOVERN
| MENT.
If they do the charter of liberties will soor
be frittered away. The charge that this
revolutionary legislation hiss no force. It nigh
be called a partisan device. Congress has tn
power, under the constitution, to raise an,
equip armies, and the house of representative
hold the purse strings. In the pending arm
bill nothing is proposed but to strike out
single clause forbidding the presence of troop
at the polls. In no respect is the authority o
the President to answer call to repel invasion
or to suppress insurrection in any way abridge
The amendment is