St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1893-09-28
ELECTION LAWS
Discussed by Lawson, of Georgia,
and Daniels. of New YORK;

OttAiCAe, III new DIX.
WASHINGTON. Sept. 81. All the
vitality was drawn out of the proceed
fngs in the house by weary three
houls fiilibuster, inaugurated by Mr..
Morse, of Massachusetts. because the
house refused to allow him to print in
Tile Congressional Record some editorial
comments attacking Commissioner of
PENSIONS Lochren. After much diff
eaity was experienced in securing a
Quorum, Mr.. Morse succeeded in pre-
venting the passage of resolution call
ing on Secretary Carlisle for his reasons
Tor refusing to purchase the amount of
silver required by law during July and
August. 1t was $50 D. m. when the
federal election debate was resumed.
Only two speeches were delivered today
one by Mr.. Lawson, of Georgia, and
the other by Mr.. Daniels, of New York.
Both were confined largely to the con-
stftutional phases of the question, and
created neither excitement nor particu-
lar interest.
Mr.. Lawson. the first speaker, is
thlck-set, sandy-compleXioned man.
looking not unlike a country Judge. His
argument was from the standpoint of
states rights.
In my Judgment" he began. 1.-THE
Democrats of the house present one of
the most sublime spectacles to be wit
messed by freemen. The successes of
the Democratic party have been coequal
with the best days of the republic, and
now it is found opposing these laws
because they threaten the liberties of
the people. The rhapsodies of Mr..
Broslus yesterday on liberty were not
effective because they were in support
OF laws that strike at the foundation of
liberty. The theory of this government
Is that If the people are not able to gov
ern themselves, it is a failure. Other
countries are governed by kings, this
country by the people,"
He went OH to draw very clearly the
limitations of the functions of the fed
eral and state governments, each SUI
preme within Its sphere. This, he
claimed, in no wise argued weakness
in either. He proceeded eXhaustively
into the history of the adoption of the
clause of the constitution under which
the election laws were passed, to show
that the construction placed upon it
was unwarranted. Although the su-
preme court has decided them to be
constitutional, the laws had been car
ried to the highest tribunal-the will
of the people at the ballot box--and the
decision of the court had been reversed.
The decision of the people should be
carried out by their repeal in order that
tie independence of the states might
not be crushed at some future time by
even more drastic laws.
Mr.. Mallory. of Florida, interrupted
to cite an illustration of the power as
sumed under this clause of the consti-
ton in his state when two Democratic
members of the legislature were arrest
ed under the federal statutes and held
until the Republicans had time to Or
ganiZe the legislature and elect a Unit
ed States senator.
With reference to the inexpediency of
the laws, Mr.. Lawson said that the only
excuse for them would be the default of
states to send their quota of represent
atives and senators. Gradually Mr.
Lawson drifted to the outrages said to
have been committed under the author
ity of the laws. He reviewed at length
the history of the notorious Lot Wright
incident at Cincinnati in 1884, when
LOGO deputy marshals armed with bull
dog revolvers were employed to keep
peace at the polls.
Mr.. Daniels, of New York, who fol-
lowed Mr.. Lawson in opposition. argued
that the election laws were absolutely
necessary to obtain honesty and secur-
ity at congressional and presidential
elections. For thirty years they were
acquiesced in. Not until Mr.. Cleveland
was nominated at Chicago was there
amy movement to repeal them. Mr..
Daniels defended the course of John l.
Davenport. but declared that if he had
abused his office it could not be adduced
as all argument for the repeal of all the
federal election laws. At the conclu-
sion of his speech the house, at 5:45,
adjourned.