Year: 1872

principally directed as in answer to
the remarks made by the gentle
man from Georgia, Mr. McIntyrel
who it appears was in opposition to
the bill establishing a national edu-
'cational fund as proposed by the
Committee on Education and Labor.


The gentleman from Georgia, in
his effort in opposition to this bill,
said that it was Objectionable be-
cause it interfered with State rights.
1 quote him /:


'The details of the original bill
are Objectionable and ought to he
Objectionable to every man who
feels any interest in the State gov
eminent"


He then proceeded to tell us why
the bill is Objectionable. I again
quote him


"Why do I say SO ? Simply from
the fact that by the Constitution Of
the United States the powers Of
legislation have been distributed.
How distributed I? All those which
the people of the country desired
the Congress of the United States
to exercise have been ascertained
and defined by the terms of the
Constitution, while all those powers
which the people desired should be
prohibited to the States have also
been defined and set forth in the
same instrument. By the Constitu-
ton, all those powers which have
not been delegated to the Congress
of the United States, nor prohibited
to the States, are reserved to the
States themselves. Now, sir, since
the organization of the General
Government, under wdich we are
legislating to-day, it has always
been understood that the power of
regulating the common schools be-
longed exclusively to the States !;
and.I am unwilling that Congress
should take from the States any of
their reserved rights. The provi-
sions of the pending bill seek to
vest the entire control of this fund
in the General Government with
out regard to the will of the res
pective State"


If we did not understand those
who keep up this great clamor for
State Rights, we might be con-
strained to believe as the gentle
man from Georgia, that no one had
any interest in their respective State
governments but those who duly
warn us against the infringements
upon the rights of the States. But
we understand them. We know
what the cry about State rights
means, and more especially when
we hear it produced as an argu-
ment against the establishment of a
fund for the education of the peo-
pie.


Judging from the past, I must
confess that 1 am somewhat suspi-
cious of such rights, knowing, as I
do, that the Democratic party in
Georgia, as we'll as in all Of the
other Southern States, have been
opposed to the education of the
negro and poor white children.
And I can, without doing that party
any wrong, safely and truthfully
state that the Democratic party to-
day in Georgia, as well as in Flori-
da, are opposed to the education of
all classes. We know that the De-
mocratic party used to argue that
to educate the negro was to set him
free, and that to deprive him of all
the advantages necessary to enable
him to acquire an education was to
perpetuate his enslavement. Their
argument against educating the
poor whites was that the negro
more directly associated with the
poor whites than with that class
who controlled the destinies of slav-
cry. Why, sir, so fearful were they
that the negro would become edu-
Gated, either through his own ef-
forts or by the aid of some poor
white person, they enacted laws pro-
hibiting him from being educated
even by his own master: and If a