Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1890-02-26
senator Fa,lkner Against the Blair BIZ

est and persistent advocacy of the Dill oy
the Senator from New Hampshire, INSPIRED
bv motives pure and above criticism,) sup
ported by Senators on the democratic side OF
the chamber whose judgement and counsel
has had great weight in influencing public
sentiment in favor of it, made it eminently
proper that those who differed with them
should with perfect candor, be ready and
willing to give the reason for the faith they
held. In his judgement the bill was freight
ed with the grave,t evils to the whole coun-
try. and more especially to those States
which Iii was assumed) would be more ben
Gifted than others by its enactment. Its
passage would commit Congress to such an
unrestrained construction of constitutional
power. and would establish such a novel and
almost unprecedented free Interpretation OF
ethe general warfare" clause, that he should
not hesitate to appeal to the courtesy OF the
Senate TO bear with him while he presented
the reasons which would influence his &C
tor, and entered on its records solemn pro-
test against the approval Ofthe constitution
alitv. equity or wisdom of the act. Three
questions, he said, presented themselves a.
the threshold which would have TO be an
swered in the affirmative by those who sup
ported the bill. These were: First, is the
bill sanctioned by the provisions of the
federal constitution. Second, are its pro-
visions. which effect the distribution of the
fund between the States and between the
two races III the States just and beneficial?
Third, is it the part ofwisdom and ofprac-
tical craftsmanship for the national govern
ment 10 embark On this boqndless sea of I'M
restrained and unlimited legislation; He
took the negative of these three propositions,
and went on to argue in support OF his view
ofthe question, quoting largely from the de-
bates in the federal convention, from the de-
eisions of judges and from the writings OF
recognized publicists and statesmen. From
these he argued that the establishment of a
common school system was necessarily COM
mitted 10 llls care and control of the States.
The principles laid down 10 Chief Justice
Marshall in the case of Gibbons against
Ogden, restraining any attemp at encroach-
ment reserved TO the respective States or TO
the people, never had been questioned or
qualified by subsequent decisions of the SUI
preme Court aad he preferred to build his
record on that foundation rather than on
the shifting opinions of active politicians or
on he irresponsible and unreliable patch
work of precedent Coming down to the
practical provisions of the bill, Mr.. Faux
ner pointed out the Inconsistency of first
distributing the fund to the States on the
basis ofilliteracy, and then distributing the
fund within the States between the two
races. on the basis ofthe school population
ofeach, so that while on the basis Of illitera-
CIV the colored schools at the South ought 10
receive S36000000 and the white schools
$l3,00O,OOO, those figures ION the other basis
would be reversed and the white schools
would receive Sl6,OOO,OOO more than the
colored schools
Mr.. Blair asked whether it was not proper
to apply the money so that it would reach
the white children and the colored children
alike?
Mr.. Faulkner replied that the bill had
been justified on the ground of its relieving
illiteracy in the States, and yet, when the
fund cot into the States one.third more
would be given to the white than to the col
ored children on the baais Of school popula-
ton, while the illiterscy of the cOlored chill
dren was forty per cent. greater than that
of the white children, That contradicted
the principle of the bill.
lIr. Blair said that was misappr.hension
of the bill-a manifest error-and was about
to explain it, but Mr. Faulkner declined to
yield the floor for that purpose, and proceed
ed with his argument. He declared that the
bill, instead Of its being ,as Mr.. Blair had
described it, new declaration ofindepend-
ence, would be a national declaration on the
part of Congress of antagoism to the COM
mon school system, and would invite friction
and discord between the sections He re-
ferred to the fact that the state of Kentucky,
which would receive S4,Sl6,0OO under the
provisions of the bill, the State of Arkansas,
which would receive S2,j3O,000, and the
State of Texas, which would received 49,
100000, all of which States had been in
favor Of the bill some years ago, had given
instructions to their Senators to vote against
it, and that the Legislature of the State of
Georgia, which would receive Sc, AS, 900, the
largest distribution ofany State in the I'm
ion, had recently postponed, indefinitely, a
resolution approving of the Blair bill. So
that four States, he said, that would receive
S17IS5,0O0 under it, an amount equal to
what the entire North and West would re-
ceive, through their Legislatures rejected its
provisions in the interests of education and
of self-gOvernmcnt. He had perfect faith
and absolute confidence in the present and
future of the South He did not intend that
the active, energetic and enterprising people
of the State of West Virginia should be held
up before the American people clothed in
rags, and crying out their poverty and hui