The Russellville Democrat., 1891-03-05
IR. HEADS SPEECH.

pass the same. l am one who will not be whipped into line. There is more baycnets in this bill In one line than there was in all the force bill. am opposed to the bill, because 1t is undemocratic from first to last. 1 am opposed to the bill, because it Is in line with the laws of the reconstruction period.
 FMr. Ford here as ked if the gentle man was not elected as an opponent of
 Democratic nominee.l
 Mir. Head answered; q do not con- | sider that was. I was elected in oppo- sition to a gentleman who claimed to be | the nominee of the Democratic party, | out say he was not. He never went ! before Democratic convention or pri- | nary. had as many good Democrats ! tt my back as he had, and more, too, | md l had no corruption fund in my | hands, as believe he and his friends lad. l bought no votes, no trades, | but came here by the vote of the good )eople of my county l had their sup ] ,oft, and tlat without money and with 1 put price.
 MT. Speaker, I might go on and make long speech against this bill, l but see that it will be of no use. The majority in this house, flushed with vic- | tory, as were the Republicans in con- gress, think they can pass force bill and that the people will stand it, but say the farmers of this state will not l lend their hands to a steal and swim dle. They are honest and they believe in honesty, and they will have it, and two years hence, when you hear the
 war -cry and the clouds hang low and dark will not be the party responsible. 1 will be in position to stand off and
 watch you fellow members as you are hunting for the rocks and mountains to.
 fall on you. The Republican party in Kansas has, just few months ago, met it's Waterloo, and 1 say to you, you
 may. and believe you will, have yours two years hence.
 II am Democrat so long as the Dem- ocratic party leads in the way of honesty and justice. am Democrat so loug as
 the party does right, but, Mir. Speaker,
 when the Democratic party goes out of the way to be dishonest-when it goes
 to placing bayonets in an election law when it goes into steal and swindle, l just be0 you to excuse me, for l am not
 in it.. My Democracy does not back
 me to do such things.
 Now, Mr. Speaker, I desii e to say no more. I would, if thought could do any good, but it is no use. The Re- publican party will not be the one to be buried two years from now, but, gentle men, watch and see what you will have
 to try to bury.n
 MT. Crabtree spoke against the bill. He Said that the present election law was good enough for anybody. He claimed to be as goo6 q Democrat as anybody, and that he opposed the pend- ing bill because it was not Democratic measure. If the failure of the passage of the bill would defeat the Dmocratic party, he would vote for it. He did not believe the success of the Democratic party depended upon the sue, ess of the bill.
 Mir DeBois argued in support of the bill and related many instances that oc-
 cured in his county during elections, in which voters were iu posed upon, all of which showed the necessity for the enactment of new election law which insured free and fair election.
 Mir Neal said that he was Demo- crat, and that his opposition to the bill did not desract from his Demo eracy whatever. He admired the pluck of the gentleman from Searcy (Mr Henley), but did not go much on his judgment. He was a young man and would grow wiser as he grew older. The young man knew nothing about the history of his party. The bill was too much like a Republican measure for him to support. The framers of it seem to have taken the force bill and Gantts Digest as guides for constructing it. Mir. Neal is one of the best story tellers in the house, and he always has an appropriat- anecdote to relate every time he makes speech. He told several stories when he spoke on the election, all of which were great ly enjoyed by the house.
 MIR. sLoAN's SPEECH.
 Mir. Sloan was glad to have the priv ilege of favoring the bill. He believed that the time for it's passage was most opportune. If the Democratic party failed to enact an election law, to which it was pledged, two years from now the enemies of Democracy would use the failure to give the people suitable law on elections as cudgel win which to strike down the representatives of the party in power. The enemies of Democracy had endeavored to impeach the present election bill and designate it as oppressive. Not single provision could be pointed out in the bill but what was equally fair.
 Section of the bill simply made it obligatory that competent judges should be appointed from different parties. Neither partisanship nor the race qnes- ton was considered and what could be fairer to the people.
 S. ction of the bill was the very spirit of fairness and could not be more liberal to all parties.
 As to the commission feature of the bill, there was nothing wrong or unjust abo at it. If that officer did his duty there would be no complaint, and if he did not he could be punished for his dere- fiction of duty.
 The bill afforded a secret ballot and preeluded the buying of votes, something which the people of all parties had re- peatedly demanded. Another whole some feature in the bill was provision prohibiting any sheriff, who is candi- date for reelection, from surrounding the polls with his own deputies. Gen. Il men had said on the floor that new precincts could be established without giving days notice. That statement was contrary to the provisions of the bill, which provides that all precincts ,hall be established thirty days prior to elections and matter of public record. As to the charges that the "bootnes,' provided for in the bill would be great cost to counties, there was little truth In the charge. The D. .mocratic party was lad to have the honor of having introduced this bill.
 Mir. Mitchell wanted it understood that his people were with the Demo- cratic party. Like the Scotch of old, his people first loved their God and