, 1879-04-01

Of tho destruction Of the Government. IL
makes no difference what your tssnc Is. II i
were the stsnpost nt,I1 most lnotfellayc PROPOSE
tcr Of coercion thai It shall bc put in every fair.
minded Republican In America would 10 bound
to rcalst II as much NJ though his own liic dc.
pended on hIs festatance. ] am not arguing %
nm speaking Of yonr methods. and I eaY that
they are against tho Constitution of our couus
Try. ] say 'liat they asn revolutionary TO the
core, and that they lend 10 the destruction Of
free consent Of all thu powers that unito to
mako tie 1aw. AK anybody to take up tny
challenge, md to show mo wl'crc hitherto this
consent has been cncfccd a. condition precedent
10 Lie supnors Of The Government. itisa llttlc
surprising TO mo Tint our frtends On the other
side should have gono Into this ereat contest on
80 slender topic rs the pne embraced In tlEa
particular ih!l. Victor Hugo sa1!, III his 90.
scrtpt0n OF the 'Ereat bhttie Of Waterloo, that
Two artntes wero liko two mighty gtants, ant1
tl.at sotnctinlca chip under the heel OF ono
might determine The victory. 1t mny be, gontlc-
men, that there % merely chip under your
heel, or It may be thnt you treRtcd 1t as clip
on our shoulder. But, whether II ia under your
heel Or OIL our shoulder, It represents mat
ter Of revolution, md WI light for tho chip as II
II were an inRot Of the richest o!e. Loud MP
rotsr ron pEMooia1,c MRMnnns
Lot lis sec what the chip Is. Do tile gentle
men knuw what. they nsk when they aaE ,1s to
repcali Who made this lam which you now do.
nlnnd to hnyo repealed In this bil1l 1t was tn~
prominent Democrat from ,hc State Of Kentucky
tMr. POWELL. 1T was Insisted unon In an nb!o
and elaborate spcccls by him. 1t was reported
against by kcnnbllcnu COMMITTEES In TINT
boay; i went throuxn days a.'d wssks Of da.
may she vote rant Ever5 Desnoysat IN tlIo aun.
ata voted Tor Il, aud uyesy Senator Who votrd
aealns. 4 was q = e., Nepu1llean. No pemocrAt
voted for it. Who rerc theyf A'r. Hendricks,
Of Indiana; Mr.. Davis or Kentucky; Mr..
johnson: Of Maryla'ti; ~. MeDuuga', Of Cali
tornta; Nj; @ @rS,vel q r. KcotSsky stt Mr. h!cs1. @
ware. Thero vera feuer Republican sunatoss
who voted lor 1t than there wore whu voty0
against 1t. Thirteen Republican Senators voted
against It, md on!y ten for, II. The bill thsn
passuRo hure. Aud how did tho vote stand In
ilis bodyt Every Democrat In the House OF
Representatives voted for it,-,slxty q them.
fhc total number Of persons who voted for Il In
| majority were Democrats. Tho distinguished
spsnser Of Tie Ilouse tSanrcl j. Rantlall y6tod
for It, The distinguished Chairman III Tho Conn
mittse % et Ways ans' Means [Fe1n'anao ,',9 Would
hs5 rom TINT stnte slr. rendutonl, voted fos t.
Every man Of leading na1ne or falnc II the Dem.
ocrat!c party why was thrn IL ti,e II Congress Of
the United Stntea Tuted for the hill, mil not one
against IT, In this unuso tl'cre wera but few
Republicans who yuted pgainst It. | was one of
the iuw. Thaddcus Stevens voted against 1t.
Whnt was the object Of tho bill at tint ti,nuf
It was this: 1t was alleged by Democratic that
In those daTs Of war there Wns interference
With elections in tho Border States. There was
no charge Of auy Interference IN the States wilare
war did not exist. But, lost there might he
some tnfraction Ut the freedom OF elections, q
| lnsgc number Of Republicans in Congress were
| unwilling to give any appearances whatever Of
interfering will the freedom Of elections, all.l
voted against this law, as M expression Ut tlser
| purpose that the army should not he Improperly
used In and about any election. -
Mr, Car}isle {Dcm.), Of kcutucky-I want to
ask II tho Democrats In the Senate uni! tho
House did not voto for TINT proposition becauao
proposition still more Objectionable to tf,c1n7
Mir. uarGeld-ihc gentleman Is quite mis-
taken. The original bill was introduced by Sen.
atof Powell, OF kentucky It was amended BY
t6e ssnass. hut lie yoto i .have siyon
TO reconsider 1t, hoping to Kill the proposItior,,
ulll for four or flYc lays 1t was delayed. It was
the House there was no debate, md therefore
no expressions Of tho reasons why. anybody
srEpHnNs IN MERRY MOOD.
afr. Stephens, Of Ha.---l wish to ask tho gen
tlcmRn II the country. ls to 10 rerolntionizcd
Inv tnt the gentleman voted against Laugh
Ter on tho Domocsatlc side.
Mr. 1arAGll-I think nut, cir. That Is moi
tho v'osncnt OF revolution that 7 have been dis
cuss!ng. The proposition, now II, tint fourteen
years iiaYo passed since tho War, untl not one
| petition from nny American citizen has como te
lis asking that tho luw DO repealed; not IN,
memorial hns found It's way to our desks com
plaintng of the law; and nor tl,u Democratic
House nf Representatives hold that, II they art
nut permitted to forco on nnotllcr l1ousu und ths
Executive, against their will url their consent
the, rcpcul of law that The Democrats madc
1t sllal! be 4 sufficient ground Tor starving tht
Government. That Is the proposition wo ar
hcre debating,
Mr. Wood (Dom.), Of New York-Dcfore tl'
gentleman leaves TINT part OF thu discussion
! desire to nsk him whether ho wIshcs +
; bill Introduced by Senator Powell, Of kcn
lucky, which resulted finally in lilo law Of 1S01
was tho bill that patsed tho Senate atal u,
House which he stated that The prcsont Bpeakc
Mr.. Garlcld-1 hayo not fnt!matcd that thor
; werc no amendments. There wcra amend
laents.
Mr.. Wood-I waut to correct tho impression
deny 1hat, 10 u fsf as l an an Esrsons!ly cor
, substitute for moro perhtc!ous mud objection
/ ab!o ,neasarc. tApplause on tho Democrat
Air. Qa1ac1d-Al say is matter of record
what say is, thur tho gentleman voted for thu
| lAw, and every Domhcrat In thu Senate ulll
e thu Houeo who voted ut all voted for It.
j hfr. Wood-1 want to AK tho Eontlema
D whether, " 1sH, " TIC time Of tee passlng, {
t try III u condition where 1t was impossible t
u exercise IN elective franchise unless tllcs
/ was some kind Of military interferenct
h nnil whether, at the expiration Of fourteen yeal
tftH Wnr hnx 1,ItA1tfnf0 TINT