A STAND FOR LIBERTY. MR. BLACKIU'RN'fI STATEMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC POSITION. A Hall Called rm the Hadienl Polity q f f'm atitutional Subvention — 7'A People'a Trust Must Not he Hrtrayed —"He Who Doubt* is Damned." Wo herewith republish from the Congrrwional lircord the magnificent speech delivered by Mr. lilnckhurn in the House in defense of the position taken by his party with inference to the repeal of the damnable Radical election laws. The Democrat who docs not read it disowns his party: Mr. Blackburn—Mr.Chairman, I tru I that in what I may have to submit lor the consideration of this committee,-! shall in no wio derogate from or lower the pilane of fairness and dignity with which in the main thi- discussion has been conducted by colleagues ou this side of the chamber. I trust tbat no utterance of mine will give color to the charge that in my judgment any sec tional question is involved in the con sideration of the issue before this com mittee. * I do not intend, sir, to be jiermnnl in nny thing that 1 may say. There tins come from different members of the other side of the House, during this de bate, that which, in my judgment, re quires and merits notice, nr.il 1 shall go back, before I shall have finished, sev eral days to reply as best 1 may to the p>oints that have been made bv the dis tinguisbed gentlctnun from Ohio (Mr. Garfield). 1 take it, sir, tbat nobody is surprised at the ap>p>earanco of the honorable gen tleman from New Jersey (Mr. Rnhcaon) who last occupiied the floor. This do bate would not have been complete or fairly rounded out unless some member of the p>rivy council of that imperialis tic dynasty under whose administration these very vicious piractices grew up, which • is now sought by this amend ment to repeal, should have npqieored upion this floor to testify in their behalf. It is charged, sir. not that the amend ment under consideration involves of itself an unconstitutional p>iece of legis lation, but it is urged by various distin guished members on this floor that it is revolutionary in its character; that it lias no piroper pdace on an apq>ropriation bill; that it is out of line, and deserves the condemnation of the House because it is an exotic in this connection and should have been considered us an in depvendent bill. It is charged tbat the tendency and operation of it will be to restrict the power of the President a commander in-chief of the army of the United States. Now, Mr. Chairman, h"i* but a poor student of this country's history who is not able to satisfy himself that from the very formation of the Federal Consti tution down to the piresent time it has ever been held, and that by the highest authorities of the land, and never suc cessfully denied, tbat it was a pxiwernot only of the American Congress but a piower of this House to control the em piloyment of the army by a withholding of supplies. The debate* upon tho formation of the Federal Constitution which lie be fore me show that the brightest intel lects assembled in that convention as serted this doctrine in its broadest term and no man dared gainsay it. It is one of those features of English liberty tbat have come down to us by adoption. It was so stated in the debate* upon the formation of this instrument, n* given to us, that it is ever and always in the piower of the House of Representa tives, by coj>ying the example of the House of Commons of England in with holding supplies, to control absolutely the employment and conduct of the army. You may follow that theory down at short intervals, nnd in 1819, when an army np>p>ropiriation bill was considered and p>.wcd in this chamber, and it was proposed to restrict the piower of the President by sp>ecifying the purpioses to which the apq.ropna tions should be ftppdied, the very same argument was made against it then that our friends upon the other side hurl against us now. It was upion that*occasion that Mr. Mercer, one of the brightest among lawmakers of the Government of his day, asserted upion this floor, without encountering contradiction, that it was in the power of the House of Repre sentatives to withhold supplies alto gether for the maintenance of the army if, indeed, that should become neces sary to control its operation. It was then that one whose patriotism has never yet been questioned, though it has survived through the greater por tion of a fading century only to grow brighter as tho ages go hy—it was then that not only Kentucky's, but Ameri ca's great commoner. Mr. Clay, declares! in his burning words of eloquence, ut tered where we now sit, that he was ready to make the issue with the Execu tive and oifer him a hill with the ob jectionable features incorporated in it, and to say to the Executive: " Sign or refuse to sign it; but if you do refuse to sign it, declaring that we have not the piower to piass it, then my answer to you will be, Deither has the Executive the power that you arrogate to your self. ' And you may come down from then till now, and never in the history of this Government has it been denied that the Constitution itself, which give* to Congress the right to piass these money bills to pirovide means for the supiport and maintenance of a military establishment, carries with it the result ant right on the piart of Congress to withhold those apipiropiriation* when in its judgment it is necessary to prevent abuses in the employment of the mili tary. In the verv nature of things this pro posed amendment of the law cannot he revolutionary. It is a repealing statute ; its only uurpiose and object is to repeal an existing Uw. I will not now piause to tell how or under whst circumstan ces it was piassed ; I will not now piause to delineate the motives which, in a great measure, because of the preva lence of natural piassions, inspired, if they did not excuse, the passage of this law. But in the very nature of things this amendment cannot be revolution- ary. Negative lugislation is nevor revolutionary. This is not aflirmutivo legislation, twist the issue as tflo gentle mat) from New Jersey (Mr. Rotioson) may seek to ilo. Buckle, the most philosophic of nil historians either an cient or modern, has told us that the statesman unci the law maker seldom, if ever, render a benefit to mankind by thu enactment of Htlirniativo laws ; that it is rather by the repealing of obnox ious and vicious enactments that they entitle themselves to the gratitude of humanity. As 1 have said, this measure is in its very nature anything but revolutionary. Will it be claimed—is there a gentleman upon that side of this chamber who w ill undertake to claim —that by reason of any provisions of the Federal Constitu tion the President now holds the power of which this amendment proposes to deprive him? Is there a man left in this House on either side who, after the clear and logical presentation of the issue made a few days since by mv col leauge frotn Kentucky {.Mr. Carlisle), will undertake to assert that there w is any such power on the part of the Ex ecutive prior to the act of Congress of 1798 f Sir, if the utmost be granted, if it be admitted instead of being denied, as we deny it, that this power was originally held by the President, it was held by reason of a Congressional statute, and of necessity the authority passing that statute and confer)ing that power must he clothed with eipiul authority to re peal it. The Constitution does not give to the President the right to send the armed forces of this Government into any State, even to suppress domestic vio lence, when the Legislature of that State, or its Governor, the Legislature not being convened, shall make a requi sition upon him. He is not to proceed upon apprehen sion, he is not permitted to antieipatc domestic violence. Neither he, nor the Executive of the State, nor its Legisla ture are permitted to exercise aueh an ticipation. It must be upon a preex isting slate of things. Domestic vio lence must exist, and that fact must be certified by the Legislature of the State whose peace is disturbed, or when that Legislature may not lie convened, then by the chief Executive of tbat Common wealth. The President of the United States is the recipient of no power of implica tion. Thqro i not a prerogative that he holds which is not clearly defined and clearly limited by the provisions of our organic law. That Constitution has made this Congress, in express terms by the |>ositive provision, the grand reservoir into which all powers of im plication How. No, sir; this amend ment cannot in the very naturo of tilings contemplate revolutionary ac tion. But is said that it is not in its proper place when engrafted upon an appro priation bill. Is there a gentleman in this chamher who will dare deny or take issue with me upon the assertion—and 1 make it measuring the full imports of my words after a careful examination of the statutes—that more than one-third of the permanent Ibgislation affecting or relating to the army of this Govern ment, as a stands up the statute looks of our country to-day, has been put there as riders upon army appropria tion bills ? 1 do not care to trench upon the pa tienre of this committee by any elabor ate review of the countless instances which that side of the Itouse has furn ished ns in the shape of precedents for the action that we take. Sir, if letters upon revolution are to be read tout, let them come front some quarter and from some member jvho is not himself con victed on the record. The gentleman front Ghio (Mr. Gar field) told us that this was an etfort. an unmanly effort, to starve the Govern ment to death. He contrasted it with what he termed the bolder and braver action of certain members of Congress in 1861, when they left their seats in these two chambers and carried their isstte to the field of carnage. He tells us that this is revolution, and he dc nounces any cfTort we make to adopt it. Mr. Chairman, better would it have been for the peopde of this land if the well-earned power of the distinguished gentleman from Ohio had leen employ ed at an earlier pieriod of his political history in averting, denouncing anil opt ioning revolutionary legislation. I)oes the gentleman rememtwr the record that he made in 1815 upon an amend ment offered by Mr. tvilson, of lowa, propiosing to revolutionise the judicial sysu-m of this country. proposing to rob a co ordinate branch of the Govern ment, nod that, too. the last barrier lie hind which the liberty of the citizen finds shelter, p>roposing to stripi the Su preme court of the I'nited States of the prerogative and p>ower with which the Federal Constitution has clothed it ? l>oes he remember the record he made when Mr. Wilson's amendment, wbicb reads as follows, was offered ? /'rwiiW, hoverrr, That If any circuit or district court of the United Stales shall adjudge any act of Congress to he uncon stitutional or Invalid, the judgment, before any other proceeding shell be had upon it, shall la- certified Up to the Supremo court of the United States, and shall be consid ered therein, and if upon the consideration thereof two-thirds of all the members of the Supreme court ahall not affirm said judgment below, the same shall In declared and held reserved. Upon the rail of the yea* and nays the gentleman from Ohio ia found vot ing " yea and then that amendment was paused through this House by the aid of that gentleman'* vote. That court then consisted of eight judge* • and under the bill it required six of the Supreme court judge*, more than a quorum, to affirm the opinion of a dis trict or circuit Federal court declaring unconstitutional one of the gentleman'* own ill advised, hasty, crude, if not par tisan measure*. Here, sir, 1 beg the at tention of the committee for a minute. A district Federal judge might hold one of the hasty law* unconstitutional; upon appeal the circuit Federal judge might affirm that decision. What then? The United Ntate* district attornev might concur in the judgment rendered. No appeal might be asked. Hut under that act, which received the support of the gentleman from Ohio, it became ab solutely imperative to certify the reoord without appeal (n body complaining) to the Supreme court of the United States. And then what? llndur the law a majority of that court constituted a quorum. Five is a majority of eight. Five of those Supreme court judges, clothed in their spotless ermine, might he upon the bench. All live of tliem might, by unanimous concurrent ac tion, declare that the two lower judg ments were cotrect, and yet that law was to be held, under the bill which the gentleman supported, conatitiftionnl and valid. Revolution ! What is there (before J gel through I will a*k this committee tft tell tnel that the parly the gentleman so ably leads has not done in that direction? Hut, sir, thi* is not all. The gentle limn from Ohio, in that effective and aide speech to wlii'-h he treated this House a p w day* ago, used the follow ing language, which I r>-ud from the ftecord: In opening Ibis debate, T challenge al' comers to show a single Instance in our his tory where this consent lis* been coerced. What consent? The consent of tho Kxecutive by extraneous mutter injected into appropriation hills. This is the great, the paramount issue, which dwarfs all others into insignificance. I accept the gage of battle that the gentleman throw* down, I read from the records and show him the instance he seeks. I find that on the 2d day of March, 18U7, a thing occurred in this House, of winch the gentleman should have been cognixant, for lie w. then a* now an honored member on thi* floor. I find the following message w.i* sent by the then President of the United State* to the House of Representative* ; To thr //--use of I{rprr*fiitat\rr The art entitled "An act making appro priation* for the supjiort "f the army' Ah. by singular coincidence that too wna an army hill, just as this is. The set entitled "An act making appro priations for the support of the army fr the year ending Juno, 80, IKUS, sn-l for other purposes," contain* provision* b> which 1 must call attention. Those pro visions are contained in the "M-nrid section, which, in certain cases, virtually deprives the President of his constitutional functions as commander-in-chief of the army, and In the sixth ection, which denies to ten slates of tin* Union their constitutional right to protect themselves in any emergency by means of their own iivi 11liss. These pro vision* are out of place in an appropriation act. I' d the gentleman from Ohio borrow hi* recently used protest froln thi* olli cial protest of the Executive of the country t Th-*c provisions are out of place in an appropriation act. I ant compelled t> de feat these necessary appropriation* if I withhold my signature to the act. Pressed hy these consideration#— I grant you, he doe* not aay "coerc ed."' Pressed by these consideration*, I fuel constrained in return the lull with n>y tig nature, hut to accompany it with my pro. teat against the aectiona which I have indi cated. AKKHKW JOIIXSOX. March 2, IM7. la there no coercion there? Why, air, the record ia full. In an act mak ing appropriation* for the sundry civil expenses of this Government for the year ending Jnne 30, IM>. P >, it was prv viile'l that in the courts of the United .States there should be no exclusion of any writnee* on account of color, or in any other civil action because he is a party interested in the iaaue to l>e tried. Is not that extraneous matter. Yet upon this bill the record shows that the gentleman from • hio ia found voting in the list of yeas. Itut, air, worse than all this, 1 find that on a memorable occasion in the Thirty-ninth Congreaa, of which the gentleman from < 'hio waa likewise a member, that occurred which will never fade from the mind# of the American people. 1 refer to the proceed in ga look ing to the impeachment of the Chief Executive of thi* Republic, which cam# so nigh resulting in conviction. <>n that occasion I find that a colleague of the gentleman from <'hio, Mr. Ashley, moved to suspend the rules to allow him to make a report from the commit tee on what? Judieary ? No. air. Prom the Committee on Territories, in the nature of a resolution impeaching the President of the American Govern ment for high crime* and misdemean ors. On the yea and nay vote I find the gentleman from Ohu> voted "yea." And I find further, sir. the counts upon which thoe iniiearhment articles were predicated, nnd I Jjieg to rsll the attention of this committee to them. Mr. A*hley said : I do impeach Andrew Johnson, Vice. President and acting President of the Unilcd States, of high crime* and misde. meanors. I charge him with usurpation of power and violation of law. And now come the five counts in the indictment, and I beg the careful atten tion of this committee, for I will bring it home to the very issue that the gen tleman from Ohio has courted in thia contest: In that he has corruptly used the ap pointidg power. I put the gentleman on his candor and submit to him to say whether he ever intended to impeach the President for thatt The country knows he did not. That appointing power had not been wielded in such away aa to merit the censure of the gentleman himself. ftecondly, in that he has corruptly used the pardoning power. I >id the gentleman from Ohio mtan to impeach him for that? I wilt an swer for him, no. Every body know* he did not. Thirdly, in that be baa corruptly used the veto power. And that was where tba sting came in. It waa the exercise of that consti tutional prerogative | it waa the em ployment of tbo veto power, for which the House and the gentleman from Ohio voted these articles of impeach ment, coupled with one other offense only. Fourth In that he ha* corruptly disposed of the public property of the United Hlatea. That waa a mere formal count in the indictment, and I doubt not that the gentleman from Ohio will admit it. Piflhly, In that he baa oorruptly Inter fared— In what? In tho elections arid did acta which in contemplation of tho Constitution aro high crime* and misdemeanors. I horn wero but two counts in that in dictment upon which it woa |>ro|Kisod to itupeach the Kxecutive; it was the exercise of the veto power, and it was his interference, not in elections, but hi* interference to prevent the interference of the armed power of this Government in the elections of this country. \V* the denunciation still ringing in that gentleman's ears which the then I'resi dent hud employed in his interview with Gen. Ktnory, denouncing u* sub versive of all the principles of free gov ernment the interference of the mili tary with the rights of suffrage at the {•oils ? Hut, Mr. Chairman, these counts in this indictment were voted on mora than once. The gentlemarf from Ohio i* recorded every time as voting in their favor. And may Ihe permitted tore . mind this committee that the record of j that Congress shows that he wis sup- I ported in his action, that he had stand i ing by him, voting side by side with , film to inipeu' h t!i President for the legitimate exercise of the veto power, i one who was then comparatively ob-curo . and who but for n combination of acci dent* would have remained to this day and until hi* dying 'lay in that ulmeuri •ty for which nature and his Creator seemed ao designedly to have fitted him j —that side by side with the gentleman | tiom Ohio stood and voted with him jMr. Rutherford R. Hayes, with whose 1-riwpective veto wo aro threatened. Applause and laughter. | Now , ir, I lieg you to tell tun by what rule of con sistenry does tho v -nth-man from Ghio come upon tin* floor to flaunt in the , face of an American Congress an antici pated exert;ia<* by th.s Kxecutive of Ins veto when he and tlmt Kxecutive both I stand committed uj on the record to I i ini ji-u( It merit if he dares to employ it ? And while 1 am at this point 1 might ik by what sort of authority cither that gentl- man or any othi r cornea upon this fl lor to threaten us with the proba hlo or poible action of that Kxecutive at all ? Wliut provision of th<- Federal Constitution, what law enacted by any preceding Congress to clothe anybody, either that President himself or one of j the privy council, even including hi* premier, hi* Secretary of State, to sit a* he did on the floor of this chamber on Saturday of last week and by hi* {ires cure and his indication* ot approval seek to intimidate, overawe < rie* of "Oh !'' on the Republican side] and browbeat an American Congress ? Who commissioned the gentleman from Ohio to tell us that we had best be careful tier a use the i*#ue was made and the Kxecutive would not be coerced into a ; message of approval? I would ak, does the gentleman j from ' 'hio, or does any other gentleman, put so low an estimate upon the self respect, the integrity, the courage and the manhood of this House, without re gmrd to party, a* to believe that such a threat so flaunted is to intimidate the law-making branch of thi* Government to shape it* action on measures of legis lation ? I cannot think that we are measured by so short a standard. Hut, sir, I am not through with the speech which the gantleman has made. He tell* us: The proposition now is, that afier four teen years have pa<*l, and nut one |rti lion hum one American ciliseti has come to us asking that this law In- repealed, white not <e* the gentleman fmm e bad ? |soe the gentleman fail to remember that the state of Ixxiisiana, a sovereign state of thi* confederacy once more, thank God, sent her memorial to these . halls, in which in thunder tone* she uttered her anathemas against the very practice which this amendment seeks to | correct ? Hut that gentleman did more; he went further, and, if possible, he did worse. I mean to deal in exact fairness. I even mean to lie liberal in the con struction I put ujon his utterance*. Mr. Chairman, it is generally true that the grave suffices to silence the tongue of detraction. It is not often that its darkened portal* are invaded to pronounce severe criticism, even though richly deserved, if it is to be pronounced upon the dead. Hut the gentleman from Ohio, forgetting himself in bis speech on last Saturday, forgot also to observe this manly and magnanimous rule, fly that speech he certainly must have aought, or, if not seeking, he wo* unfortunate in producing the impression that a distinguished dead senator from the state of Kentucky had introduced into the Federal Senate chamber the bill which we by this amendment seek to repeal, and send hi* name down to {•oaterity to be blasted by the act, if in deed be had performed it, and that charge to rest upon that genlleman'a own high authority. 1 hold in my hand the very bill, No. 37, which was intro duced upon the fith of January, IWJ, by Senator Powell, of Kentucky. There liea before me on my desk the manly, statesmanlike ami patriotic, bold utter anoea that be delivered in the shape of a speech upon the consideration of that bill. 1 challenge the gentleman to find within the limiU of this measure sin gle, solitary provision, line, sentence, word or syllable that thia amendment aeeka to repeal. Ih>e* not the gentleman know—lf he does, not, it b his fault—that the amend ment Incorporated upon this bill which we now seek to repeal waa incorporated and ungrafted upon it, not when the Senate waa in Committee or the Whole, but la open Senate, upon motion of Senator Potneroy, and when the rote wu* taken upon that amendment hy ' ya* and nay*, eve ry solitary Democrat in that chamber voted ngninst it and put the <-hI ol their condemnation uj/on It, Mr. Powell anions the number ? Horn stand* Senator Powell's utterance, in which lie explain* how and why it wa that the liemocratio members in that body and thi* body at I*l accept ed thi* a* the best that could he had : noth withstanding. against tin ir protest, the ingrafting of the Poinoroy amend ment, Iwchuso it. was to be taken in lieu of what they charged vra* true, of what the President of the United State* in an official communication to Con gress had declared to he true, that in the absence of even the limitations that amended bill would give, the military authorities and officers of the Govern i incut had arrogated to themselves the j power in ull the lately seceding states | of declaring what should he the qualifi cation of voters and what, should he the i qualification to hold office. It was a* I the h-asl nlli-nt-ive of two offensive alter- I natives. It was not candid, it wa> not fair; the record rebukes the gentleman for seeking to pl-.ee a dead statesman in such a false position. Hut, Mr. Uhnirmun, it is iis-ip§ to follow lliwn thing* further. It ;* r,t. sir, for me to waste the time and trench upon the patience of this committee b> following out the tergiversations through which the I'"publican party ha* wound 11self to this high plana of protaai I against revolutionary legislation. Why, I ir, the gentleman from n revolutionary legislation Ito be delivered from such a source. (Applause, i There i* hut one issue here, and lin , sist that neither lids House nor the people of this countrv shall be allowed to wander from It. St is hut this, and nothing more; whether the military power shall bo allowed at your {tolls: whether the election* shall 1-e guarded Iby the mailed hand of military {tower; whether the l>allol-hox, that last and safest shield of the freeman's liberties, shall lie turned over to the tender mer cies of the armies of your land. Or to | slate it yet more tersely and probably more fairly, it is simply whether the spirit and the genius of this Government shall Ite reverses!, and whether the civil shall be made sul-ordmate to the mili tary power. Why, sir, among the most farored, the most cherished ami precious princi ples ingratifled on our system of govern ment from our old prototype, the Kng ! li*h people, is that provision which : would not tolerate not only the inter ference hut the presence of the military j at the {>oll*. over one hundred year* ago an Kng lish statute declared the will of Kng ! lishmen upon this Tital question. I read the statute : He it enacted by the King's most excel i lent Msjstj, hv sml with the advice and I consent of the lyortb, spiritual and U-mpr f rai, and Common* in Parliament assemble,!, .and by the authority of the tame. That when and as often as any election of any • peer or peer# to represent ths peers of Scotland in Parliament, or any member or : member* to serve in l'arliar.n nt, shall lie appointed to he made, the Secretary at War for the time being, or in case there be no Secretary at War, then such person who shall officiate in the place of the Sec* 1 retarv at War, shall, and is hereby requir* od, at some convenient time before the day appointed for sikh election, to issue and send forthprojicr orders, in writing, for the removal of every such regiment, troop or csimpany, or other number of soldiers as *hall he quartered or billeted in any such city, borough or town or place where auch election shall be appointed to be made, out of every such city, borough town or place, onc-dav at the least before the day ap pointed for such election, to the distance .f two or more miles from such city, borough, town or place, as aforesaid, until one Jay at the least after the {sill to lis taken at such election shall be ended and the poll books closed— S/ahit* tfsosyr 11. From that time till now I do declare that it is not within the power of any man to find a single scion of the Saxon race that has not held in utter abhor rence the efforts of him or them who sought to control the freedom of the ballot by the employment of the mili lary power, {Applause- j The very artuy of this country protests against such a prostitution of its service. I see before me the justly distinguish ed general in-chief ot our artuy, and I do not believe that 1 overstate the fact when 1 say that from him down to the private in the ranks it ia difficult to find one who has not recoiled tront Ibui ser vice which they have been called upon to render. [Applause.] ft is this question, and It is none other, that I insist shall be kept before this House. We are declaring that the ballot shall be free. We are denying that it is either constitutional, legal just, fair or decent to autyeot the so* sign to the surveillance of the soldier. Now. upon that iwue the gentleman from Ohio and his associates tells us that they stand committed. I amser •o do w... W.! * r - willing to discus* it, and (or my part, 1 ahull opsone any limitation being put upon tin* debate. If we cannot stand upon an issue *o broad, so constitutional. ao catholic, ao fair, ao free aa thin, then tell me in heaven'* name where urn there battle ments strong enough for ua to get be hind ? Io*r | to celebrate h r recovery of ber long l'>*t heritage by tearing oil these de -1 grading badge* of servitude and destroy- J trig the machinery of a corrupt arid partisan legislation. W * do not lutc-nd to stop until we have stricken tn la*t vestige of our war measures (rotn the statute hook, which I.Ie these were Uirn of the pas •ion* incident to civil strife and looked to the abridgement ol the liberty o( the citizen. \l e demand an untramtr.eled elee tion ; tio supervising of the bailot 1.-y • the army. Free, at>*olutely free right to the citizen in the deposit of his ha!- I lot a* a condition precedent to thepaa*- j age of your hill*. Now, sir, if the gentleman from Ohio ; i* to be excused, for surely ho cannot be justified, if be i* to be excused for parading before this House the tiireat, Ihe argumeiUum ta I' rrorrn, of a veto that m already cut and dried to he placed upon a hill that is not yet paascd ; if be i to he pardoned for warning thi* : House that the bxccutive branch of this Government wili never yield in <-nr ! to this measure in it* present form, may ' I not he warranted and justified in em- I ploying equal candor, and may 1 not as sure that gentleman and hi* associates l (hat the dominant party of this Con gress, the ruling element of this body, ' i so equally determined that until their just demand* are satisfied, de mands sanctioned by ail laws, human and divine, protected and hedged t around by precedent* without number, | demanded by the people of this land without regard to section, who are i clamoring for a free, untrammeled bal ; lot (not for the South. I beg you to re member, for if there be sectionality in thi* i*ue 1 cannot discover it); for I'hiiadelphia a* well a for New Orleans, j for Ssn Franciao and ikiston a* well a* i for Charleston and Savannah—that this side of the chamber, which ha* demon strated its jsower, never mean* to yield or surrender until thi* Congress si. *ll ; have died by virtue of it* limitation. Applause on tho Democratic side.| Wo twill not yield. A principle ciannot be compromised. It may be surrend ered. but that can only lie done by its advocates giving proof to the world that 1 they are cravens and cowards, lacking the courage of their own conviction. We cannot yield and will not surrender. Iori with pleasure, that this is the res toration to jxiwer of a |arly a* old a* our Government itself, which for almost a hundred year* ha* stood the boldest, fairest, fr<*est ex{>onent and champion and defender of ths doctrine of consti tutional limitation* again*t the doctrine of the aggrandizement of power. It is thi* organization that ha* come hack to rule, that mean* to rule, and mean* to rule in olwdienoe to law. Now, sir, the issue i* laid down, the gage of battle is delivered. Lift it when you please; we are willing to appeal to : that sovereign arbiter that the gentle i man so handsomely lauded, the Amen ; can people, to decide between u. Standing uj>on such grounds, w# in tend to deny to the President of this Republic the right to exercise such un constitutional power. We do nntynean to pitch thi* contest upon ground of "objection to bim who happens, if not | by the grace of God, vet by the run of luck, to be administering that office. I tell you bere that if from yonder oanva* ipointing to the picture of Wash ington) the first President of thi* He public should step down and resume tliosn power* that the grateful |>eople of an infant Republic conferred ujoo him as their first Chief Magistrate, if he were here fired by that patriotic ardor that moved him in the esriier and bet ' ter days of thi* Republic, to bim we would never consent to yield sueh dan gerous anil unwarranted powers, to rest the liberties of the citizen u|-on any one man's discretion, nor would be re ; oeive it. It was not for the earlier hut for the later Executives of this Government to grasp and seek to retain such question able prerogatives. You cannot have it. The issue is made: it is made upon principle, not upon policy. It cannot be aliandoned ; it will not be surrend ered. Standing upon such ground, clothed in such a panoply, resting this case upon the broadest principle* of eternal justice, we are content to appeal to the people of this land. There i* no tribunal to which we are not willing to carry this case of contest; and we are willing to allow Him who rules the des tinies of men to judge between u* and give victory to the right. Ido not mean to tasue a threat. Un like the gentleman from Ohio, I dis claim any authority to threaten. Rut I do mean to say that it is my deliberate conviction that there is not to be found in this majority a single man who will ever consent to abandon one jot or tittle of the faith that is in him. He cannot surrender if be would. 1 beg you to be lieve he will not be coerced by threats nor intimidated hy parade of power. He must stand upon his conviction, and there we will all stand, lie who dallies it a dastard, and he who doubts is damned. IG reat apple use on the Demo cratic side. ] How to acquire short-band —fool around a buss saw.