CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



153 



William J. Smith, Wortliington C. Smith, Stark- 

 weather, Stevens, Stevenson, Stokes, Stoughton, 

 Strickland, Strong, Sypher, Tanner, Taylor, Tilman, 

 Townsend, Twichell, Tyner, Upson, Van Horn, Van 

 Wyck, Wallace, Ward, Cadwalader C. Washburn, 

 William B. Washburn, Welker, Wheeler, Whiteley, 

 Whitmore. Wilkinson. Willard, Williams, John T. 

 Wilson, Witcher, and Wolf 144. 



NAYS Messrs. Archer, Axtell, Beck, Biggs, Bird, 

 Booker, James Brooks, Burr, Calkin, Conner, Cox, 

 Crebs, Dickey, Dickinson, Duke. Eldridge, Fox, 

 Getz, Gibson, Griswold, Haight, Haldeman, Hamble- 

 ton, Hamill, Hawkins, Hay, Holman, Johnson, 

 Thomas L. Jones, Kerr, Lewis, Manning, Marshall, 

 Mayham, McCormick, McNeeley, Morgan, Morris- 

 sey, Niblack, William W. Paine, Potter, Price, 

 Randall, Keeves, Rice, Rogers, Schumaker, Sherrod, 

 Shober, Slocum, Joseph S. Smith, Stiles, Stone, 

 Strader, Swann, Trimble, Van Auken,Van Trump, 

 Voorhees, Wells, Eugene M. Wilson, Wood, Wood- 

 ward, and Young 64. 



NOT VOTING Messrs. Adams, Allison, Arnell, 

 Banks, Barnum, Benton, Bowen, Boyd, Burchard, 

 Cake, Cleveland, Corker, Dawes, Nathan F. Dixon, 

 Dox, Farnsworth, Fitch, Heflin, Hoge, Ingersoll, 

 Alexander H. Jones, Ketcham, Knapp, Knott, Milnes, 

 Mungen, Packer, Lionel A. Sheldon, Sweeney, Taffe, 

 Winans, and Winchester 32. 



So the bill was passed. 



In the Senate, on February 24th, the above 

 bill of the House was considered. 



Mr. Vickers, of Maryland, said : " Mr. Presi- 

 dent, this bill seems to be the offspring of a 

 bill passed at the last session of Congress with 

 the specious title of an act to enforce the right 

 of citizens of the United States to vote in the 

 several States of the Union, and for other pur- 

 poses. The effect, if not the object of the bill 

 of the last session, was to intimidate and over- 

 awe the free citizens of the United States 

 who were entitled to the right of suffrage; 

 but the people were so prudent, forbearing, 

 and discreet, that no disturbance was created, 

 and therefore no pretext furnished for an at- 

 tempted interference with the freedom of 

 elections or to set aside the elections which 

 were held in the States. 



" Thus the bill failed of its effect ; the results 

 of the elections were not such as the framers 

 of the bill contemplated when they introduced 

 and passed it in Congress. It became neces- 

 sary therefore to bring forward the present 

 bill to strengthen the weaknesses of the bill 

 of last session and to supply additional and 

 stringent measures in reference to future elec- 

 tions to be held in the States. Both bills are 

 obnoxious to constitutional objections ; they 

 are bills inexpedient, unjust, and unfit to be 

 executed in the States. 



" This bill assumes the power of the Gen- 

 eral Government to superintend and regulate 

 registrations and elections in the States for 

 Representatives to Congress, and to punish by 

 fine and imprisonment where such registra- 

 tions and such elections are made and held, as 

 well for State Legislatures and officers of the 

 States. The power is claimed under the first 

 clause of the fourth section of the Constitu- 

 tion, which reads : 



The times, places, and manner of holding elec- 



tions for Senators and Representatives shall be pre- 

 scribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; 

 but the Congress may at any time by law make or 

 alter such regulations, except as to the places of 

 choosing Senators. 



"In pursuance of this provision the State 

 Legislatures did prescribe the times, places, 

 and manner of choosing Representatives to 

 Congress, and under those regulations the 

 General Government was put into operation, 

 and has continued down almost to the present 

 time, without any interference on the part of 

 that Government except that in 1862 an act 

 of Congress was passed providing for the dis- 

 trict system, instead of election by general 

 ticket. This was alleged to be necessary, to 

 preserve the rights of minorities. The reason 

 for giving this poAver to the States in the first 

 place in the Constitution was 



"1. That the State Legislatures, coming 

 fresh and direct from the people, knew best 

 what times, places, and manner of elections 

 would suit them. The General Government 

 was further removed. 



"2. The framers of the Constitution had 

 strong reasons for thus investing the States 

 with the power. They knew that the Consti- 

 tution would not be adopted without it. 



"It was defended by Mr. Hamilton in the 

 Federalist in three numbers; and he put it 

 expressly on the ground of the necessity of 

 placing the ulterior authority in the General 

 Government. 



" Both Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Madison place 

 the power on the express ground of absolute 

 necessity, and assert its exercise only 



" 1. To protect the existence of the Govern- 

 ment. 



"2. To prevent an end being put to the 

 Union, in the language of Mr. Nicholas. 



"3. In the language of Mr. Madison, to pre- 

 vent its own dissolution. 



"4. And if the State governments should 

 not attempt to use the power to destroy, Mr. 

 Madison said it would never be exercised by 

 the General Government. 



"Judge Story, in his Commentaries on the 

 Constitution, embraces the views of Hamilton, 

 Madison, and Nicholas. 



"Mr. President, there is one principle that 

 runs through all these authorities which I have 

 submitted, and that is, that Congress can only 

 interfere to perpetuate the Government, to 

 prevent its dissolution. That is the very ground 

 upon which the framers of the Constitution 

 placed the defence of this provision. If it had 

 been asserted at the time when the Constitu- 

 tion was under consideration that Congress 

 should have the power at any time, at its own 

 pleasure, to withdraw from the States the 

 regulation of the time, place, and manner of 

 holding elections, the Constitution never would 

 have been adopted. It required three labored 

 articles from General Hamilton to defend this 

 provision, on this ground of absolute necessity 

 and of self-protection. 



