Daily Republican., 1879-04-02
FIRST EDITION.
ruEEx-REBEL TACTICS.

den. Harfleld's Great Speech or tho
Attempt VI the DepmOcrnis Ia Co.
srce Congress Into Their Measure"
On the Starvation Plan.
MIR. Garfield commenced his speech
by referring to the gravity and solsm.
nity of the crisis that had now bsen
brought upon the country and declared
that the House had to-day resolved to
enter upon . revolution against the
Constitution and the government, and
that the consequent Of that resolve II
persisted in meant nothing short OF
subversion OF the government. lie
sks,shed the points at issue between
the two Houses at the lose OF tho last
Cepgress and read from'a report OF one
of the Senate coufsrees to the effect that
tbe Democratic confsrees on the part OF
the House we're determined unless the
action of the House was concurred IN,
10 refuse making appropriations to car
nv on the government, and he also quo
ted from the speech Of Senator Beck
fano,her of the conterees) to the effect
that the Democrats claimed the right
which the House OF Commons In Eng
land had established after two centur-
i-s Of conquest, TO say that they would
not grant the money Of the people un-
l,s, there was a redress of grievances.
These propositions, continued Mr..
Garfield, in various forms, more or less
y.hemently, were repealed in the last
House. and with that situation Of af-
fairs the session came near Its close.
And now the new Congress ID assem-
bled, and after ten days Of dsliberation
the House OF Representatives. has re-
sol, ed substantially to reafirm the
prouosition Of its predecessor; on these
PROPOSITIONS We are assembled to day.
lie argued that there were some ways
in which this government might be ut
terly annihilated without the firing OF
a gun. The people might refuse to
elect Rep est natives. the Legislatures
to elect Senators, and there would be
no process of compulsion; or a bare
majority of one in either house might
agree to adjourn at the moment Of
meeting each day. The government
would die, 1t was not so with the Ex
ecutive, who had no power 10 destroy
tine government, for there was the pow
sr OF impt achment.
A pIorusITIoX TO DESTROY THE GOVERN
MENT.
At a first view it might seem remark
able, he said, that a body Of wise mel
like those who framed the Constitution
sbould have left the whole side OF th'
fabric of the government open TO thoa
deadly assaults, hut on another view
of the case they were wise. What wa
their r.lianccl II was on the sover
eighty Of the nation--on the crowned
and annointed sovereign TO whom al
American citizens ownel their alles!-
ance. That sovereign was the body
the people of the United States, insplr
ed their love OF couDtry and Their seil'
of obligation to public duty. Publ
opinion was deemed asutliGient meaSur
10 guard thar side of the Constitution
and those approaches to ths life ef tn
nation absolutely from all danger an
all harm. Up to this hour our sovei
eiga had never failed us. There ha
never been such abstention from til
exercises OF those primary functipps
sovereignty as are to cripple or endan
ger the government. And now, Tor IN
first time in our history (and Will sa
for the first time in at least two cent?
ries in the history of English speakln
people), has it le4n propo'si, or
least insisted upon, that these revolu
tonary powers shall BE- used for tn
destruction of the government. l wal
it understood that.
THE PROGRAMME IL THIS:
That if We cannot have our way in
certain manner We Will destroy I'll
government of this country by usln
the voluntary powers, not OF the pee
pie, hut Of ourselves, against the GOV
ernment to destroy it. Will anybod
challenge line OF the statement tina
trc. consent is the foundation OF all @
our institutions And yet the pre-
rra,ume announced two weeks ago was
that If the Senate refused to consent I
the demand of the House the govern
ment should stop. The proposition wa
then, and there is not Senate 10 Ve'
il. there is still a third independer
factor in the legislative power OF til
government, which is to be coerced
the peril Of the destruction to the gov
.rnmept. 1t makes no difference VIII;
your issue is. If 1T were the simple
and most inofiensive proposition in I'll
world, yet if you demand as matte
OF coercion that it shall be put II
every fair minded Republican in Anne
lea would be bound to resist you
though his own life depended on II
resistance. l am not arguing at preset
Al to the merit Of your three amen
ments at all. am speaking Of yo'
tmethods, and | say that they a
against the constitution OF our cou
try. | say that they are
REVOLUTIONARY TO THE CORR
and that they tend to the destruction
the first element OF American libert
which is free consent of all the. powe
that unite to make the law. ask an
body to take up my challenge and
show me were hitherto this consent h
been coerced as condition precedent
the support of the government. IT Is
little surprising to me that our frien
on the other side should have gone
TO this great contest OH 50 slender
topic as the ous embraced in this pa
tiuular bill. Victor Hugo said, in
description of the great battle OF Watt
loo, that two armies were like II
mighty giants, and that sometimes
chip under the heel of one might det,
mine the victory. 1t may be, gent
men, that this is merely chip und
your heel, or it may be that you tire
/, No n chin off your shoulders. Is