228 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



shall have a written constitution. Its constitu- 

 tion may be like that of Great Britain, without 

 one word of writing. Now if the word ' form ' 

 be taken in its most narrow sense, pray what 

 is the guarantee worth in a case where there 

 is no written constitution of a State ? " 



Mr. Carpenter: "That well illustrates what 

 I was trying to illustrate in another way, and 

 it comes back to this : the question is, whether 

 by that article of the Constitution it was in- 

 tended to guarantee something to a State, or 

 nothing; whether it was meant to deal with 

 the reality of the thing, or with the mere fiction 

 and form ? " 



Mr. Norwood, of Georgia, said : " Before the 

 Senator passes from that point, I wish to ask 

 him a question ; and I will state in advance to 

 the Senator that my object is to get light on 

 this subject: because it is in my opinion the 

 main point in the case, and the one in regard 

 to which I have felt greatly embarrassed. I 

 wish him to state whether he thinks there is 

 but one remedy where a republican form of 

 government has been destroyed or overthrown ? 

 The remedy he proposes is, by act of Congress 

 to order a new election. Does he consider that 

 a better remedy than for Congress, if it ascer- 

 tains, as he says it can, by a review of an elec- 

 tion in the State, that a minority has over- 

 thrown the majority and taken possession of 

 the government, to determine that the majority 

 shall have control of the government ; and, if 

 necessary, to authorize the Executive to see 

 that the majority shall be installed? " 



Mr. Carpenter: "The Senator, of course, is 

 aware that I do not think that McEnery was in 

 fact elected, although the returns show that he 

 was." 



Mr. Norwood : " I understand that. I am 

 merely asking the Senator whether he thinks 

 it is better to order a new election than to have 

 those put in power who the returns show 

 were elected." 



Mr. Carpenter : " If I believed that McEnery 

 was in fact elected at that election, the logic of 

 the situation would dictate that Congress, if 

 that were necessary, should recognize his gov- 

 ernment. But in the first place I do not be- 

 lieve that the MeEnery government has any 

 more right than the Kellogg government. In 

 the second place the McEnery government 

 never had an existence in fact. 



" Mr. President, these interruptions (of which 

 I do not complain) have drawn me somewhat 

 away from the line of argument I intended to 

 pursue, compelled me to interrupt the order 

 in which I intended to discuss the topics in- 

 volved, so that in returning to my subject I 

 may repeat some things I have said. But I 

 will resume, as well as I can, the thread I had 

 in hand when I was interrupted. 



" In the first place, if the present state of 

 things in Louisiana amounts to a usurpation, 

 then Congress may prescribe a remedy, or it 

 can prescribe no remedy in case of any usur- 

 pation in a State. I had supposed that it was 



universally conceded that this article of the 

 Constitution was intended to vest this power 

 in the General Government, that the guarantee 

 of republican government was intended to pro- 

 tect the people against usurpation, and that the 

 guarantee against domestic violence was in- 

 tended to protect the State government against 

 turbulence within the State ; and that the ju- 

 risdiction to determine whether the state of 

 things existing in a State authorized the Gen- 

 eral Government to interfere for the purpose 

 of executing the first of these guarantees was 

 vested exclusively in the General Government, 

 not in the State; and I have read from the 

 writings of Mr. Calhoun, the great champion 

 of State rights, in support of this view. 



"And when it is conceded, as it is by the 

 Senator from Connecticut, that the only exist- 

 ing government in Louisiana is, 'root and 

 branch, a usurpation,' I supposed Congress had 

 the power, and was obliged, to provide some 

 suitable remedy ; and the bill under considera- 

 tion seems to me to provide the only suitable 

 remedy. 



"But what seems to me a very important 

 element of this case is, that we are not now 

 considering in the first instance whether the 

 Federal Government ought to interfere. The 

 fact is, the Federal Government has already 

 interfered through its judicial department. A 

 Federal judge acting not only without juris- 

 diction, but in confessed violation of an act of 

 Congress, has organized this usurpation ; and 

 the question is whether Congress has the power 

 to undo the wrong he has done, by restoring 

 to the people of that State the right of which 

 he has deprived them. Can it be maintained 

 that a Federal judge, in open defiance of Fed- 

 eral law, may take a State government from 

 the hands of the people, confer it upon usurp- 

 ers, and that Congress is powerless in the 

 premises ? It may be said the judge might be 

 impeached. This would punish him, but would 

 not redress the wrong. The Kellogg govern- 

 ment would still exist, protected by Federal 

 troops, unless Congress should interfere; and 

 I can imagine no form of interference that 

 would redress the wrong, except to restore to 

 that people, as this bill proposes, the right they 

 have been deprived of, to choose their own 

 rulers. And I shall be curious to hear the 

 Senator from Connecticut point out any other 

 remedy. For that, however, I must wait until 

 he shall see fit to, reveal it. 



" I understand that the Supreme Court of 

 the State is in collusion with Kellogg, has al- 

 ready corruptly decided many cases in his favor, 

 and will continue in the same course. There 

 can be no judicial remedy in that State, and 

 the remedy of force is forbidden by the Con- 

 stitution of the United States. -This State gov- 

 ernment will not inaugurate any movement to 

 overthrow itself. The people of the State can- 

 not ; because, first, the Constitution of the 

 United States forbids it ; and, second, because, 

 if they should attempt it, they would be con- 



