The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1879-08-20

was over and others only admitted To bail OF
the condition that they would promise not t
vote, others again only on condition that the,
r would surrender their naturalization papers
papers that he had no more right to take from
. them than he had to take their goods AM
chattles-when that done, was that no
interference with the election of the officers o
the State? Was that simply regulation o
the manner of electing members OF Congress
Was that not an interference with the election
: of the members OF the Legislature OF the Stat
who were to be chosen at that election! Wa
it not an interference with the election 0
one Of the Judges Of the highest judicial tri
bunal of that State then to be chosen? Wa
it not an interference with the election of ever
State officer who was voted for at that election
Who can deny it? Nobody can. And, sir
will you tell me that Congress, under the
power to regulate the manner of elections IL
the choice of members Of Congress, can frame
a law in such wise as really to authorize
deputy Marshal of the United States to teal
the State judges of election from their seat
and confne them in prison andsstop the cleo
tion and that all that is not interfering with
the rights of the States to hold their election
for State officers according to their own laws
viii you tell me that that is the exercise Of
the power to regulate the manner of electing
members OF Congress No, sir, it will not
stand one moments examination. There are
some things so clear that argument upon them
only serves to obscure them, and this is one OF
them. man would be absurd who should
argue that two and two do not make four but
/ he would be scarcely more absurd than he who
should argue that laws which permit the in
/ reference of which have spoken can be sus-
tanned under the provision of the Constitution
authorizing Congress to regulate the manner
/ OF electing members of Congress.
What follows, Mr.. President, from this ?
/ Congress has the power to make regulations re-
specting the manner of electing members Of the
| House Of Representatives. Undoubtedly it
has. Whether that power is limited, as l first
suggested it might possibly be, or whether it is
much broader than that and applies to State
which has provided such regulations or not,
there is one thing, | repeat, that is fundamen-
/ tai, to-wit that Congress in the exercise of
/ that power shall so legislate as not to inter
fere with the right of the State in the choice of
/ her own officers. Congress has, it will be adj
mitted, authority to do that for, mark it, this
provision of the Constitution does not stop with
saying that Congress shall have the power to
regulate the manner of such elections it
authorizes it, in respect to the election of
members of the House of Representatives, to
prescribe not only the manner but also the
time and the place of election, so that it is
perfectly easy to avoid all conflict with State
authority and all interference in State elections
Mr.. BAYARD The State cannot avoid it.
Mr.. THURMAN. No. the State cannot avoid
it, as my friend suggests. Some one has said
that the State might avoid it because it might
provide that its election should be held upon
a certain day different from that provided by
the Act OF Congress for the election of MEM
beers of the House of Representatives but
Congress bent on extending its power, bent on
usurping power over the State elections, might
Immediately change the times of holding the
Congressional elections and fix them on the
very days of holding State elections.
But if Congress will take the matter in
hand, if it will disgrace the State if it write
brand of infamy on the brow of every State
officer engaged in conducting elections and
say he is not to be trusted, if it will ignore our
history for three-fourths of century, if it will
say that every State officer is a felon, for Gods
sake let it keep within its own powers and do
it in a way about which there can be no mis-
mistake. Let it provide that the election of
members of Congress shall be many days
after the State election, and then let it pro-
vide its own agencies for carrying on that
Congressional election, or let it permit the
State to provide for it as it may see fit. My
friend from from California Mr.. Farley sug-
gests to me that in his own State every State
officer, from the highest to the lowest, is elect
ed on the same day that Congressman are
elected But under the pretepse Of the power to
regulate the manner Of choosing members Of the
House Of Representatives, this Government thatsts
its and nth its money, (,chich 1t has spent
heretofore in that State with no stnted hand to
troll elections and Nth It's hundreds, ay, than
thousand, deputy m,arshdls and supervisors which
It has employed there in the past and which.a may
employ again merit tlU if the lars remain unchanged;
It intereres directly nth the choice Of erery State
officer. When a Senator shows up so fla
grant a alsurpation as this, my friend
from Minnesota says his objection is simply
GAS usual" that the law is unconstitutional.
God forbid that such objections should not
be usual with me. When such an objection
ceases to be usual with me, it will be when
l myself shall have ceased to have the power
to make it.
/ might show more instances in 'rhich these
statutes interfere nth the right Of State to regu-
late her oUa elections. Ihdre already mentioned
t,oo of them. Here is a State which requires
registration before any man can vote for
State officer, and which provides officers who
are to Judge of the right of a man to register.
They act under oath, they render an honest
Judgment as to the right of the man to vote
but then steps in this Federal statute and says
that if the man will swear that he was qualif-
ed and offered to register and was rejected the
judges of election must disregard the State law
and permit him to vote, although in their
opinion as well as in that of the registrar he
is not qualified elector. They must give
effect to the false affidavit.
/ referred awhile ago to the fact that there
is State law in certain States requiring
man to pay a tax before he shall be entitled to
vote. Suppose man presents himself at an
election for State or municipal officers in one
of those States and offers to vote. The judges
of election say to him; "Have you paid your
tax? ?" He answers, "No; but offered to pay
it, and the collector of taxes refused to receive
it." The collector and perhaps half a dozen
others, who were present at the alleged
time and place of offer of payment, step up and
make oath that no such offer was made. The
testimony is conclusive and ind4hitable that
the mans affidavit is false. What must the
judges do? Under the State law they are
bound to reject the vote, and they have sworn
to obey that law. But here steps in this law,
enacted by Congress, and says to them: you
shall receive it; and if you refuse to do SO,