The free press., 1892-10-13

control of Congress.
Like many otner partisan conspiracies
the Davenport bill is proposed in the
name of reform, and its defenders pre-
tend to find warrant for it in that pro-
vision of the Constitution which de-
clares:
"The times, places and manner of hold
ing elections for Senators and Represen-
tatives snail be prescribed in each State
by the Legislature thereof; but the Con-
gress may at any time by law make or
alter such regulations, except as to the
places of choosing Senators"
For hundred years this provision
has remained in our organic law, and no
Congress has been bold enough to exer-
else the undoubted right wnich its terms
give under certain extraordinary circum-
stances to annui State election laws and
place virtually the entire control of cleo
tions of Representatives in the hands OF
Federal supervisors. No Congress has
yet been bold enough to exercise it be-
cause no great emergency for which it
was designed has arisen, and no Con-
gress, except the last, has had the tenn
Gritty to place any other construction up
on its meaning than that put by the
convention which framed, ana the peo-
pie who ratified it.
Under what authority, then, and upon
what plea do men thus attempt to sub
cert the Constitution, establish an i'm
mense army of Federal spies, incur an
expense of many millions, set one class
of officers against another, annul State
laws and make partisan Federal ap-
pointees the judges of elections.
There is no authority for it and no ex-
cuse. 1t is a policy of force and par
tisanshlp. 1t Is the last arbitrary resort
of an INSCRIPTIONS and tvrannical ma
jority. 1t is the design of a party which,
afraid to leave the question of its con-
tinuance in power to the free vote OF the
American people, is ready to employ any
methods which will prolong its tenure
of office.
Have you thought what an immense
political machine the enforcement of
such a law would create? An army ef
$50, 600 workers and resources Of $10,-
900, 900 for every Congressional election
all in the interests of purer electionsl
am astonished at the intellectual ca
pacity of any public man who pretends
to believe that such an exercise of power
was premeditated by the men
who made our Constitution | am sorry
for the un-Americanism of any person
who does not believe such bill as this
to be hostile blow at our form and
theory of government, and pity the
partisan prejudices which prevents pa
triotic men from joining in the denun-
citation which they must feel for such an
uncalled-for usurpation of power; but I
am surprised at the hypocrisy of states
men who urge and defend it upon the
ground of pure elections, and am
amazed at the audacity of politicians
who have devised it as scheme of party
policy.
REPUBLICAN CORRUPTION.
The country has not forgotten the
scandalous corruption of four years a~o.
by which the Republican Party ca Ae
into power. 1t has not forgotten the
enormous sums collected from manufac-
turers for the bribery of voters in the
doubtful States. 1t has not forgotten
those two epistolary incidents of the
campaign-the Foster "fat- frying" cir
cular and Dudley's "blocks-of.ive"
letter.
And it is yet not ready to believe that
the chief participants in those outrageous
performances aud the principal bene6-
ciaries of this wholesale corruption are
other than hypocrites and betrayers Of
the country's welfare.
The Davenport bill, instead Of being
in the interest of pure elections, Is
direct thrust at them. To prevent such
scenes as characterized the election of
1888 several States have recently passed
reform laws which, it is believed, will
make bribery and intimidation almost
impossible. New York has such law. In
Indiana there is one. Connecticut and
New Jersey each have one. Numerous
other States now have them. But the
Davenport bill, if enforced, would
practically render those laws useless,
although its provisions are carefully
worded to produce an opposite impress
sion.
will not charge that the trainers of
that bill deliberately intended to prevent
the operation of those laws in Federal
elections, but when we now know that
a notoriously versatile supervisor of cleo
tions in New York is the author of this
bill, and when | hear men who sit in
high places by virtue of corrupted suf-
frages talk loudest in their advocacy of
this measure, l feel justified in the sus-
picion that the party which debased
thousands of voters in 1883 is not averse
to removing the obstacles to similar
carnival OF corruption in future elec-
tions.