124 



Here is set forth the power of the State. By 

 the Constitution a State has original jurisdic- 

 tion of the ' times, places, and manner of hold- 

 ing elections for Senators and Representa- 

 tives ; ' and it is from this provision of the 

 Constitution that the State gets its power over 

 the subject, so far as the Constitution of the 

 United States is concerned. 



" Either one or the other of two things is 

 true : either these words, as herein employed, 

 in their scope and meaning cover the entire 

 subject of elections, from the qualifications of 

 the voter to the deposit of his ballot in the box, 

 or else, by necessary legal inference, the States 

 have not the power which they have been in 

 the habit of exercising ; for if this be a quali- 

 fied and limited grant or recognition of author- 

 ity, then what is not granted or recognized 

 they do not possess. But the history of the 

 facts from the first, and the recognition by 

 Congress of the powers of the States, go to the 

 extent of conceding to them entire scope and 

 original control of the whole matter of voting, 

 including the qualifications of the voter, his 

 registration, and the deposit of his ballot in 

 the box. 



" Let me read what remains of this provi- 

 sion: 



But the Congress may at any time by law make 



" Very broad language 



or alter such regulations, except as to the place of 

 choosing Senators. 



" Now, sir, taking the language of the Con- 

 stitution itself, divested of all theories and 

 traditions concerning the meaning put upon it 

 by State-rights men, can any thing be more 

 clear than that the Congress of the United 

 States has all the power which the States could 

 exercise, except merely as to declaring where 

 the Senators shall be chosen ? Can there be 

 any doubt that the powers granted to or rec- 

 ognized as existing in the States, whatever the 

 extent of those powers may be, are the meas- 

 ure of the powers which Congress may exer- 

 cise ? And therefore, when a State-rights man 

 proves that by the Constitution of the United 

 States a State has a right to decide who shall 

 exercise the elective franchise, he has proved 

 also that Congress may do the same thing 

 under this provision of the Constitution which 

 says that Congress may make any regulations 

 it chooses relating to the subject, or may alter 

 such regulations as have been made by the 

 States. 



" This is no new doctrine. It was asserted, 

 as I have already stated, in most of the con- 

 ventions which ratified the Constitution of the 

 United States. It was declared again and again 

 in the Convention which framed the Constitu- 

 tion of the United States. 



" What is the conclusion, then, of the whole 

 matter, upon the text of the original Constitu- 

 tion, in reference to the question of suffrage ? 

 Why, first, that the power to make regulations 

 concerning elections is vested in the States ; 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



and, secondly, that the power of the General 

 Government upon the subject of the franchise 

 is just as comprehensive as the power of the 

 States, and that we may make regulations, and 

 that we may alter such regulations as the States 

 have made. This view is supported, first, by 

 the necessary theory of the Government that 

 it cannot exist independently of the States if 

 this power in the General Government is de- 

 nied. It is also supported by the debates in the 

 Convention that framed the Constitution itself. 

 It is supported by the debates in the State con- 

 ventions which ratified the Constitution, where 

 the issue was distinctly made upon that ques- 

 tion between the friends of the Constitution 

 and its opponents. The opponents of the Con- 

 stitution charged that it contemplated precisely 

 what we now say it means; the supporters of 

 the Constitution did deny that it contemplated 

 precisely what we say it means, and upon that 

 ground they advocated the provision. The 

 opponents of the provision in four of the States 

 sought the submission of an amendment to the 

 people giving a different and more limited con- 

 struction to the article. The Congress of the 

 United States refused to submit such an amend- 

 ment. This is conclusive evidence that all the 

 men who participated in framing this Govern- 

 ment were of opinion that the power to regu- 

 late elections was in the States, subject to the 

 supreme control of the General Government ; 

 and this without any inquiry into other pro- 

 visions of the Constitution, which give us ample 

 basis for all the legislation we now propose. 



" I come next to the consideration of a pro- 

 vision of the Constitution on which I might 

 safely rest for the exercise of this power, cer- 

 tainly as far as several States are concerned, 

 even if all that is granted to Congress in the 

 provisions relating to representation were 

 wanting. I refer now to the provision of the 

 Constitution by which the United States are to 

 guarantee to each State a republican form of 

 government. 



" What is the nature of the difficulty with 

 which we are now dealing ? Is it a difficulty 

 in harmony with republican institutions and a 

 republican form of government, or is it a diffi- 

 culty which is antagonistic to republican insti- 

 tutions? What is the essence of an aristoc- 

 racy? How is it distinguished from a repub- 

 lic ? The essence of an aristocracy is in this, 

 that the government is in certain families 

 made hereditary to the exclusion of others. 

 That is all there is of it. You may limit this 

 aristocracy to twelve men, you may enlarge it 

 to a hundred, to a thousand, or to ten thousand ; 

 but, if limited, if certain persons are included 

 and certain others are excluded, not for them- 

 selves merely, but for all their posterity, you 

 have an aristocracy. There is, I submit to this 

 House, no other possible definition of an aris- 

 tocracy; there is no other possible honest dis- 

 tinction between an aristocratic and a republi- 

 can form of government. 



" I say without hesitation that none of those 



