Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1893-09-27
DEBATE ON ANOTHER REPEAL.
The House Gets to Discussing the National
Election Law.


Election Law.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 27.-The debate on
the federal election law repeal bill has
begun, but in spite of the interest taken in
the matter there were not more than sew
enty-five representatives present to hear
the opening guns. Tucker began the de-
bate. BE argued that the statute which
it was proposed to repeal was unconstitu-
tional, and that congress had no right to
confer the power that it had upon su-
pervisors of elections The right of suf-
frage was a right preserved to the states
and granted specifically in the constitu-
ton. The right of suffrage rested in the
states of the Union. He planted himself
on the ground that the right of citizen
to vote ives a right given him not by the
constitution of the United States, nor by
the federal govern ment. but by the right
preserved in the state and recognized by
the constitution.
What right, he queried, was worth hav-
ing that was put into the hands of anoth-
er? He held that the elective function
and the determining function must go
hand in hand.
Milliken Rep.) of Maine asked several
questions on this point and suggested that
the gentleman from Virginia might be
elected from his state as representative
of his district, but if his right to his seat was
challenged the case would be passed upon
by federal power.
Tucker replied that was provided for in
the constitution.
Tucker continued with his constitution
al argument against the law and declared
that if the original right of suffrage was
in the state the federal government had
no right to come in and claim the power
of counting and canvassing the vote.
e 1f76Sr Sre9Gsvfsne-tsHlse IzStntes by its supess
visors and deputy marshals supervise an
election under a law which il had not en-
acted, or scrutinize the registration IA
condition of suffrage in many of the
states) when the right of suffrage emanat-
ed from the state itself and the state
alone could determine it?
In reply to a question by Henderson of
Illinois as to whether there was not ne
cessity for federal supervision at the polls
Tucker said he was not discussing the
question of necessity; be was discussing
the question of power. Then Tucker
opened on John l. Davenport, declaring
that the atrocities of the Duke of Alva did
not exceed Davenport's atrocities. When
asked how it was that "Sunset" Cox had
reported eulogistically of Davenport to tie
house, Tucker said that if Davenport was
an angel of light in 1877 he had no such
reputation now, except upon the principle
that the laws he executed were SO poor
that they should be repealed.
They were an evidence of past era in
our history. We belonged to generation
that was looking no longer to the past
but to the future. We wanted to strike
from the statute books every trace of re-
construction measures. He belonged to a
party that was not a sectional party. He
belonged to party that did not believe
in anything sectional. The Republicans
had violated the pledges of the fathers, had
overridden the constitution, had denied
the right of habeas corpus, had shown the
people that they were not worthy of con-
fidence and the people had elected Dem
ocratic president and Democratic con-
gress. [Laughter.l
Brosius of Pennsylvania held that the
constitution of the United States had been
created by the people, not the states Be
ing asked why the fathers had never used
the power conferred by the con-
stitution to supervise elections he
said because villainy was progressive
| and the fathers had never had such vii.
lainy to deal with as had obtained since
the war in depriving citizens of their right
| at the ballot-box. Compton replied by say
ing that no party except the Republican
had ever acted the part of the tyrant over
| American citizens, to which B-osius re-
| piled that Compton's arrows were mot
| feathered with the wings of knowledge u
| Laughter.