The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-09-12
For, if bryan Carries Ont His Pledge,
Mr.. Harmon Says, We VIII Have
No Federal Government.
LAWS OF THE LAND QUOTED
TO SHOW THAT UNCLE SAM Is SU-
PREME MASTER OF HIS OWN.
Bryan's Doctrine Shown to BE More
Dangerous than Secession.-Mr.
CIeveland's Action Upheld.

WASHINGTON. Sept. 11-Attorney-gen-
eral Harmon to-day furnished the following
for publications
II have concluded to give an answer to
the many inquiries made of me upon sub
ject of great moment. to which general at
tention is directed.
Mr.. Bryan, in his letter accepting the
nomination for President by the conven-
ton at Chicago amplifes the protest which
that convention made in its platform
against federal interference in local affairs.
which, strangely enough, is not found in
the platforms of the other two conventions
which have also nominated him.
LAS nothing else has been proposed to
which they possibly apply. these pro-
tests We're intended and understood to
be directed against the recent action of the
President in forcibly suppressing riotous
disorders which had stopped the carriage
of the mails and interstate commerce and
were defying the civil officers of the United
States The President took this action not
only without the request, but in some in
stances against the protest of the authori-
ties of the States in which the riots oc-
Cured, and Mr. Bryan, taking Section
of Article ~ of the Constitution, to be the
law on the subject, pledges himself against
any repetition of the violation thereof,
which his letter necessarily charges. lie
vindicates the wisdom of the trainers of the
Constitution by declaring that the local
authorities are better qualified than the
President to judge of the necessity for fed
eral assistance
This, in my Judgment. is far more
serious matter than the money question or
any of the other questions that are now
before the people, grave as they all are.
Our form of government may survive
wrong decision of those questions. and the
people may endure for time the evils
which result from false systems of finance
and taxation. but if the President has de-
liberately diregarded the instrument upon
which the Union is founded by supplanting
the authority of a sovereign State by
armed force, a precedent has been made
which threatens our form of government.
while if candidate for President properly
pledges himself in advance, as Mr.. Bryan
has done, to do nothing to protect the
property maintain the authority and en-
force the laws of the United States unless
and until the officers of another govern
ment request or consent, then we really
| have no federal government, for gov
ernment which is not entirely free to use
| force to protect and maintain itself In the
| discharge of it's own proper functions is
| no government at all. The section OF the
| Constitution to which Mr.. Bryan refers Ii
| as follows
| every State in this Union republican
| form of government, and shall protect each
| of them against invasion, and on appllca-
| ton of the Legislature or OF the executlve
(when the Legislature cannot be conVeneu)
| against domestic violence.
FEDERAL POWER SUPREME.
| This section plainly refers to the protec-
| ton of the States against interference with
| Iax Or dOmpS-
! tic violence and they are wisely made the
! sole Judges whether and when they need
such protection. Mr.. Bryan betrays a con-
sciousness of the limited operation OF this
| provision In the expression federal assist
| ance in the clause l have quoted. But Dy
| the express terms of the Constitution a
| State has nothing to do with the mainte-
| nance of the authority or the execution OK
! the laws of the United States within the
| territory of the State. The prevention and
punishment of offenses connected with tho
mails with interstate commerce and with
! the administration of justice in the federal
| courts are committed to the general gov
ernment and to it alone. Such offenses in
| no wise menace the government of the
| State within which they are committed
| Therefore the State cannot require protec-
ton against them The State has no duties
| to discharge in these matters. Therefore 1t
| can require no federal assistance with re-
| spect to them.
| "Of course domestic violence often, as in
| the recent ribts is directed against both
| State and federal authority. indiscriminate-
| lv SO that either or both may suppress 1t.
| And in such cases the action of each in
| maintaining it's own authority over the sub
| iects committed to il tends to aid the other.
| But in such cases each is acting in its own
| independent right as a sovereign governs
/ ment and on it's own behalf. 1t would be
as absurd TO claim that the United States
/ must neglect its own interests because in
protecting them those of a State may be
| incidentally protected to claim that
State must let riot run free because 1t hap
pens to be directed against federal rights
| or officers as well as its own. This would
| limit and belittle the sovereignty of both
governments. ImperiUm in imperio would
| be false.
| According to Mr.. Bryan there IS some-
where implied in the Constitution, for II Is
not here expressed. prohibition OF the
use of force by the United States against
| persons who within the limits of a state,
NAV be successfully resisting it's officers
and completely paralyzing all its operations
| as a government unless the local authors
| ties shall first make request or give con-
sent This is contrary to the settled prin-
ciple that while the federal government is
| one whose operations is confined TO certain
| subjects il has as TO those subjects. all
| the attributes of sovereignty, and one OF
| these is always and everywhere, within the
! territory of the States which compose 10.
to suppress and punish those who in any