CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



M0 



harm can result from the repeal of such a law 

 is to my mind inexplicable. Without its re- 

 peal the substantial ends of justice will con- 

 tiniio to bo det'f.-itfd, mill tlio sanctity of the 

 \vnlirts and judgments of juries and of courts 

 will sink into ridicule and contempt. Surely, 

 any law which becomes contemptible in its 

 execution and irritates rather than appeases 

 and assuages popular sentiment is radically 

 wrong and ought to be repealed. 



"The conference committee were eqnally 

 unfortunate in not agreeing upon the provi- 

 sions of the bill which repeal the laws author- 

 izing the appointment of supervisors and 

 deputy marshals. So far as the supervisors 

 are intended to supervise elections and see 

 that a fair count is had, I have heard no com- 

 plaint. These officers are selected from both 

 political parties, and, if confined to simply su- 

 pervising elections to prevent fraud, there is 

 not any special objection. But, when these 

 officers are used for police purposes to make 

 arrests and otherwise interfere with the rights 

 of citizens there is a vital and fundamental 

 objection. There is no warrant in the Con- 

 stitution for clothing supervisors with police 

 powers ; that power is lodged with the States. 

 But,. grant that the Constitution clothes them 

 with police duties and powers, why should 

 they, aided by an army of deputy marshals, 

 turn upon that Constitution and rend it by 

 defeating a fair election ? That such has been 

 the unvarying and oft-repeated result for 

 years past is not seriously denied that I am 

 aware of. These deputy marshals are invaria- 

 bly selected on account of their known parti- 

 sanship and efficiency in manipulating and 

 managing elections; they are appointed by 

 the Administration on account of their facility 

 and readiness to work for the attainment of 

 party ends. 



" Realizing that the language of the Consti- 

 tution (Article I., section 4) only confers the 

 power upon Congress to decide when, where, 

 and how the elections of members of Congress 

 may be held and conducted, but does not ex- 

 tend to the qualifications of voters except such 

 as are made necessary under State constitutions 

 to render a citizen eligible as an elector for 

 members of the most numerous branch of the 

 State Legislature, this House and the country 

 feel that the system of laws which should pro- 

 tect the sanctity of the elective franchise may 

 be and has been converted into an ingenious 

 enginery to deny and even overthrow the pu- 

 rity of the ballot-box, which lies at the base of 

 the very citadel of freedom. All agree that in 

 America a free, unobstructed, and unintimidat- 

 ed ballot is fundamentally essential to free in- 

 stitutions, and any supervision which prevents 

 its voluntary and unfettered exercise is at war 

 with the spirit of the Constitution, no matter 

 though its empty forms may be complied with. 



Li The practical effect of these laws has been 

 V prevent fair elections, and arouse in the 

 public mind the gravest apprehensions for that 



purity and legality without which elective gov- 

 ernment becomes a simple mockery. Jf in- 

 timidation and the fear of arrest drive electors 

 from the polls, or force them to vote against 

 their will, in what does the plebiscitof France 

 which elevated Napoleon to be the supreme ru- 

 ler of that country differ from our boasted righto 

 of suffrage ? No more violent assault was ever 

 made upon the freedom of the elective fran- 

 chise in France during that period of simulated 

 liberty to which I have just referred, when to 

 have refused to support this mock hero of re- 

 publicanism was equivalent to incarceration in 

 the Bastile, than was made in the great city of 

 New York and other places on the day of the 

 election in November last, when thousands of 

 American citizens were arrested and impris- 

 oned with the sole view of preventing them 

 from voting. That such acts of tyranny so 

 utterly subversive of liberty may not be re- 

 peated, this House has taken its stand in the 

 sacred name of freedom, and demands the re- 

 peal of the laws under the cover of which these 

 wrongs were perpetrated. 



u Tlie right of the Representatives of the 

 people to withhold supplies is as old as English 

 liberty. History records numerous instances 

 where the common feeling that the people 

 were oppressed by laws that the lords would 

 not consent to repeal by the ordinary methods 

 of legislation obtained redress at last by re- 

 fusing appropriations unless accompanied by 

 relief measures. 



" Tliis is not an ordinary affirmative propo- 

 sition which is here sought to be ingrafted up- 

 on this bill to be carried through by virtue of 

 its momentum, but it is simply a relief mea- 

 sure, a repeal of a bad law. The system of 

 laws so ingeniously blended to obstruct the free 

 exercise of the elective franchise, and against 

 which the majority in this House is now ar- 

 rayed, grew out of the military ideas which 

 have dominated the legislation of this country 

 since the war. But the time has now come 

 when these measures of injustice and inequality, 

 so long and so patiently endured, must give 

 way to the advancing and well-grounded sen- 

 timent of free elections in all the States of this 

 Union, and the equal rights of all men at the 

 ballot-box. As long as these relics of military 

 domination remain upon the statute-book, just 

 so long will the public mind continue to be 

 agitated. As long as statutory contrivances 

 continue to be used to defeat the popular will, 

 so long will the people struggle to wipe them 

 out. As long, too, as these measures encumber 

 the statute-book, economic questions of admin- 

 istration will retire before their presence. For 

 what matters any given line of policy if the 

 people are denied the right of suffrage, or if 

 the chosen Representatives of the people are 

 ejected by arbitrary power from the places to 

 which they have been elected ? We therefore 

 submit the general disagreement, and now rele- 

 gate to the House the trust imposed by the ex- 

 pression of its judgment and action. 



