The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1891-12-25
The democrat.
FEDERAL roRcn IN THE MESSAGE.


II would be unjust to accuse Mr. llarri-
son, upon the evidence of his message, Of
Bouibonlsm which learns nothing. His
Is only the BoLrbonism which does not
forget.
Admonished by the result Of former ex-
pertinent In that direction lie does not re-
new his recommendation Of Mr. Lodges
Force bill plan. But animated by the old
federalist spirit he still hungers fer federal
control In state affairs, and urges upon
congress two measures looking to the en-
largement OF federal power and the sub
iectlon Of the states.
lie wants constitutional amendment
passed to take away from the states the
right secured TO them by the constitution
to prescribe, each for Itself, the manner In
which its presidential electors shall be
chosen. Tie also wants non partisan
commission created to devise some scheme
OF federal supervision over elections In the
states, for the purpose OF preventing con-
gressIona! and legislative gerrymanders
aud of enforcing the right of each citizen
| to vote.
Now, for the gerrymander there is not
one good word TO be said. The right oi
every citizen to vote Is sacred and should
be secured by law. Uniformity In the
method of choosing presidential electors
Is so desirable that, with the single ex.
eep,ion of Michigan, all the states In fact
and voluntarily choose them In the same
way.
But the trainers OF the constitution, be-
Iieving that liberty is more secure under q
federal republic Ut limited power com
POSED Of states regulating their own AZ
fairs In their own way than under a con-
solidated government, wisely left II to the
states to provide for these necessities, eaei
according to its own views and cireum
stances. Accordingly Massachusetts for
bids those of her citizens who eapnct rese
TO vote, while New York deems 1t wisei
not to limit the suffrage. Michigan pre-
fers to choose her presidential electors-
who are peculiarly state otfeers-in wa,
different from that employed In otheI
states. Her decision may be unwise, bu
II Is her right under the constitution tC
make IL.
And Il ls surely best, II there Is AM
virtue In the fundamental idea of our sys-
TEN, that every state shall enjoy such con
troll over It's own aHalrI and that the gen.
eral government shall keep It's hands of
II that liberty had not been secured BY th'
constitution the constitution would neye
have been accepted and The federal 90 vern
ment would never have been formed.
Mr. HRrrIson's idea Is that the states anS
the people might be persuaded TO surren-
der their liberties II the matter were pre-.
sen,ed In less objectionably partisan form
than II wore In the Lodge Force bill. Il
that Mr. Harrison Is pretty surely mis-
taken. Federal eneroachment upon loea
self.gnyernment by the states has already
gone dangerously far, and hostility to i,i
further advance Is the hostility OF prineipl'
and prudence, not merely OF partlsanshiP
The people do no, want federal Interior
ence In elections, whether that interference
u done by an administration OF one oI
another Political faith. They are eonten
win our system as IL Is. They do mol
want It reconstructed upon the theories o.
Hamilton, which were deliberately reject
ell when the constitution was made. Th'
republic Is satisfactory. lie, It alone -
New York Void.