MR. GREAT PLEA.
AN HISTORICAL AND JURIDICAL
DISSECTION OK THE
STALWARTS.
NO MKTttOD RUT REI'KAb VOK VICIOUS
STATUTKS WITH OI'I'RXMM VK
INTKNT.
The llouso of Representatives having
under consideration the bill making ap
propriations for the legislative, execu
tive, and judicial expenses of the Gov
ernment for the fiscal year ending Juno
30, 18*0, and for other purposes, Mr.
Carlisle said:
Mr. Chairman: I shall discuss the
questions now under consideration in
the committee, so far as 1 shall discuss
them at all, in no mere partisan spirit,
and yet it may be necessary for me to
state some facts and submit some con
clusions not strictly of a non-partisan
character. The first question which
presents itself relates to the form of
the proposed legislation and the method
hy which it is sought to he accomplish
ed. So much has already been said on
this subject that 1 shall treat it very
briefly. Whatever the gentleman from
Pennsylvania who has just spoken (Mr.
Kelley) and others may think as to the
propriety of incorporating substantive
legislation into appropriation hills, no
one of thetn can deny that it lias been
so frequently done during the last quar
ter of a Century as to have bec.ui.e t le
rule rather than the exception. f n
ty-four ye.irs ago this House ineor;>or .t
-ed into the Consular and Dij '"*u ie
Appropriation hill—the timet inu: j io
priate place that could be imagined---!
complete revision of ail the tariff laws
of this country and sent it to the Senate.
That provision was struck out in that
body after a long debate, not because of
the form in which it came, but because
of objections to the substance of the
legislation itself. And it is entirely safe
to say that, at least since Ist'd, almost
every general appropriation bill paced
by Congress lias contained provisions—
and in many instances most important
provisions—repcalingjold laws or enact
ing new ones, and tliis has boon sanc
tioned by both political parties. Occa
sionally protests have been made as
they are made on this occasion, but ;n
no instance, so far as I am aware, has
such a protest been effectual. During
the long domination of the Republic..n
party in this House political legislation
of the most important character was
constantly enacted in the bills and a
part of the very laws which wo now
seek to repeal were passed in the Sun
dry Civil Appropriation bill approved
June 10, 1872. The very last I.egiia
tice, Kxecutive and Judicial Appropria
tion bill passed in Congress during the
time it was under the control of that
party contained a provision under which
every gentleman froqi the State of lowa
to day claims and holds his seat upon
this floor. It is a very brief provision,
and I will read it:
That section 2o of the Revised Statul-s,
prescribing the time for holding elections
for Representatives in Congress, is hereby
umditb-d so as to apply to any State that
ha* not yet changed its day of election
and whose constitution must be amended
in order to effect a change in tho day of
the election of State officers in said State.
And the very next ssciion in the bill
is one providing for the removal of suits
from the Stale court* to the United
States courts in certain case*. But, Mr.
Chairman, I need not stop to cite pre
cedents or nuke an argument to show
the existence of the right to resort to
such methods of legislation. That the
practice has heen established and that
the right exists is admitted by gentle
tuerron the other side; hut they charge
that it is revolutionary to exercise the
right in this particular instance, be
cause it is known or assumed that the
proposed legislation does not meet the
approval of the Kxecutive. It seems to
ine that this places the gentlemen in a
far worse position before this House and
before the country than if they had
taken the bold and manly ground that
all the precedents established hy them
selves were wrong and that the right to
legislate in this form does not exist.
To say that the practice ho* been estab
lished during a long series of years by
both {lolitical parties and that the right
does in fact exist, but that it is revolu
tionary to exercise the right in any in
stance where it does not happen to meet
the approval of the I'resident, is to say
that he is the master of the people's
representative, and that we ought to
abandon an admitted practice ami to
surrender an acknowledged right at lii
dictation. It is admitted that it is neith
er unconstitutional nor revolutionary
simply to repeal these laws; hut it is
charged that it is both unconstitutional
nnd revolutionary to attempt to repeal
them in a manner the Kxecutive does
not like. One gentleman, at least—the
gentleman from Maine (Mr. Krye)—has
been candid enough to declare on this
floor, amid the applause of his political
friends, that we should not rejieal these
election laws until, in some manner,
the present Kxecutive had heen remov
*■ ed from office. Here is the exact lan
guage of the gentleman, as reported in
the official debates:
You have not repealed the law affording
protection to the voter at the poll* y*t
You have not repealed the election laws
yet; and you will not repeal them ut.til
you have removed the present Executive
from his chair. [Applause.]
Sir, thia present* a square issue from
which we, as the representative* of a
majority of the people, cannot shrink
without dishonoring ourselves and de
grading our constituencies. If thrrc
had previously been a doubt a* to the
propriety of the course we have adopt
ed, that declaration and its indorsement
by the party of the Kxecutive on this
floor ought to have dissiimted it. It has
dissipated it, and I believe to day we
stand as thoroughly united in our de
termination to assert the supremacy of
the popular will under the Constitution
and to rodree* popular grievance# hy
lawful means as any body of men have
ever stood since our race first bexan it*
struggle for free government and indi
vidual liberty. First we are told hy one
gentleman standing high in the coun
cils of bis parly that we will not he per
nutted to repeal theae objectionable
laws in the form now pro|ioaed j and
then another, with equal authority to
sneak, emphatically announces that we
shall not repeal them at all in any
; form. Under such circumstances a#
i these what difference does it make to
n* or to the people whom we represent
whether the British House of Commons
hits attnehed legislation to supply hills
during the lust two centures? We rep
resent American citizens, not British
subject*. We ore dealing with an Amor
ican President, not a British king. The
Kxecutive in this country has no pre
rogative in the monarchist sense of the
term ; he has only certain ]>owerx con
ferred upon him by a written Constitu
tion and hy statute ; hut when he threat
ens to abuse that power, if he should
ever mako such a threat, for the pur
pose of defeating legislation admitted to
lie deliberate, constitutional, and not
injuring his rightful authority, all the
means which the House of Commons in
Knglund was justifiable in using to pre
vent an abuse of the king's prerogative
we are equally justifiable in employing
here. It is true, Mr. Chairman, that
| for nearly two hundred years the prac
tice of "tacking" on supply lulls or ac
companying such hills with petitions for
redress of grievances has not been re
sorted loin Kngland, hut the House of
Commons, to which alone that right fie
longs, has never by any net or dicclarn
tion abandoned or surrendered it. And
I beg to remind gentlemen of another
historical fact equally pertinent in this
discussion, which is, that for nearly the
same length of time the veto power has
not been exercised in Kngland. Since
ITtiT, when the.Queen vetoed the Scotch
Militia bill, no British sovereign lias
vetoed an not of the British Parliament.
It is, in fact, the veto power that has
died in that country. It could not live
in the presence of that great principle
of the British Constitution which dis
solves the Ministry in every conflict be
tween the Crown and the Commons.
The executive power there is directed
by a cabinet of ministers and not by the
king, and in the whole world there is
not to he found a body of men ill an
thority more sensitive to the popular
will than they are. In the face of a
vote of want of confidence or an adverse
vote on an important Government
measure, they disappear as if they had
been smitten by the arm of Omnip
otence itself. Any sovereign who should
now attempt to retain a ministry in op
position to the will of the Commons or
to persist in any important measure of
government which did not meet their
approval would certainly imperil the
peace of the kingdom, if be did not
lose his crown. But my eloquent and
learned friend from Virginia < Mr. Tuck,
erj has so fully and clearly stated the
character of the British Government in
tins respect that nothing can be usefully
added to what he has said. We are
told, however, that the grievance of
which we complain is a law upon the
statute book ; front which I suppose the
inference is to he drawn that it is not a
grievance for which the Kxecutive is
responsible, and therefore ire have no
right to make its redress a condition
upon which we grant supplies ol money
to be expended by that department of
the Government. This statement omits
the important and controlling fact that
the statute of which we complain is one
which authorizes the Kxecutive to send
thousands of his subordinate officer* to
the jmjlls to interfere with our election*
as members of this House ; and it is a
just rau*e of complaint against him
that he insists upon maintaining and
exercising such a dangerous and uncon
stitutional power. The exclusive power
to originate money hill*—which include
appropriation bill—belongs under tlie
Constitution to this l*>dy. This gives
us the right and makes it our duty to
determine when, under what circum
stances, for what purj>ose* and to what
amount we will pro|M>e the appropria
tion of the people's money. If we have
not this right, if this is not our duty, if
Congress is a mere machine to lie set in
motion hy the hands of the Kxecutive
to grind out such appropriations as may
be recommended, then we are clearly
wrong in this controversy and the gen
tlemen on the other side are right.
But if the Constitution has conferred
this power upon us we are not wrong
unless we abuse it and for that we are
responsible, not to the Kxecutive, not
to the minority here on this floor, but to
the people who sent u* here. I'pon all
question* of this chaeacter they are the
exclusivo and final judges. A great
writer tqion institutional law ha* said :
Whenever a question arise* between the
society at large ami any magistrate vested
with powers originally delegated by that
society it must be decided by that Society
itself. There is not upon earth any other
tribunal to resort te.
If unfortunately thia proposed legis
lation slisll fail by reason of au irrecon
cilable difference of opinion between the
executive and legislative departments
of the Government, both must appeal to
the original source of their power and
abide the result. It is revolutionary to
join in this appeal rather than surren
der our conscientious conviction* upon
a subject virtallv affecting our own priv
ileges nnd the liberties of our constitu
ent*, the country will rebuke us and we
will be compelled to bow in submission
to its judgment. Now, sir, let us see
whether these laws are of such a char
acter as to justify us in taking the posi
tion we have In demanding their repeal.
I will endeavor to show, Mr. Chairman,
ns briefly as the nature of the subject
will permit, that they are so opposed to
the spirit of our institutions, so repug
riant to the Constitution itself and so
oppressive upon Hie people that we are
justifiable in declaring that we will not
make this appropriation except upon
Hie condition that they are removed
from the statute-book.
It is my purpose to discuss today
only that pat t of the pending hill which
relates to the repeal of what are known
as the election laws. A* to those pro
visions of the existing law which ex
clude fmm the jury boxes in the courts
of the United States all those who are
unable to take a certain teat-oath, they
are so manifestly inconsistent with the
Knglish and American systems of juris
prudence and so fatal to tho due ad
ministration of justice between man and
man and lietween the Government and
its people that I ran not persuade my
self that any considerable number of
gentlemen here or elsewhere will tinder
take to defend them. The gentleman
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Kelley) char
acterir.es these provisions very mildly
indeed when he says they constitute
"an exasperating incongruity ia our
law."
As to those laws which relate to the
' elections, they are baaed upon the as
sumption that in the present condition
of the country it is constitutional, wise
and necessary to clothe the Executive
with authority to interfere with nnd
control the election of members to this
House, and I shall deal with them a*
laws enacted and maintained for that
purpose.
This is no sectional question ; and it
ought not to he even a party question.
It is a question of vital interest to every
friend of constitutional liberty ami to
every lover of free parliamentary gov
j ernment throughout the whole country.
: It is a question which affects the people
j of the North more than the people of
the South. According to the census of
| 1870 there were sixty-nine cities in the
| Union to which the most offensive and
most objectionable parts of these law*
are applicable, fifty-live of them in the
North and fourteen of them in the
j South. The fifty live in the North con
j tninrd a population of nearly five mil
lions of souls, while the fourteen in the
; South contained only a little over one
million and two hundred thousand.
If we look at the expenditures we will
find that more than five times as much
money was disbursed in the years lH7'
and 1878 to pay for the service* of su
pervisors nnd s;>ecial deputy marshals
of elections in the Northern States as in
the Southern States. The whole ex
penditure in lK7f> was ♦275,296.f>0, of
which the sum of ♦230 .'<22 wa* paid for
services in ix Northern States and only
♦44.774.iH) for services in the South. In
lh"8 the whole sum expended was ♦202,-
2111 OW—so far n rejairlc-d—and of this
tin- sum of ♦177,052 was on account of
service* rendered hy these officers at
election* in the same *ix Northern
State* and ♦24,039 in the whole South.
Rut, sir, I slutll not go at length into
that matter. I long to see the titne
come w hen the patriotism of our public
men and tin- fraternal feelings of our
people shall bo broad enough to ac
knowledge but one boundary—the
limits of th is whole Union. [ Apjdnuse, ]
If that time has not arrived it i a con
solation to me to know that I have never
purposely said or done anything to p.ost
j*>lie it.
Mr. Chairman, greater thnn all other
questions affecting the constitution and
organization of this House is the que*
lion whether thi* power of the Execu
tive to interfere in the election of its
members "hall he continued. If there
be one principle in our Federal system
more valti sl le to the people than on
other it is that which was intended to
secure the perfect independence of their
Representatives. Thi* i* the people's
Hone ; this is the only place in the
council* of the Union where tliey speak
and vote through Representative#
chosen directly hy themselves. The
right to choose their own Represent*
lives belongs and ought to belong to
. them exclusively. The jxawer of the
Executive, so far as it can legitimately
affect the action of theme Representa
tives, must he exercised for the firt
time not only after the election but
after the will of the people ha* been re
corded here in the passage of bills.
Under the Gonslitution he may with
hold hi# assent frotn our measures when
they are sent to him in the regular way,
hut he cannot elect our member* or in
terfere with their elections without a
violation of every fundamental prinri
pie of free Republican government and
a subversion of our most cherished in
stitutions.
He may not come into this hall and
dictate the measures we shall pnas or
shall not pans; he may not without the
grossest indecency, oven send his omis
sarie here to influence our delibcrnt ion#
either hy threats or disapproval or by
expression# of approbation; and yet it
is contended thai he ought to have the
power to dictate our policy in advance
j by choosing the men who are to oonsti
, lute our meml>er#hip. I.et the country
understand distinctly what it i* the
genth-men on theother side are contend
ing for. They are not contending for
free and fair elections; they are not
contending for a pure ballot and a fair
count, liec*ue these result# can he bet
ter aecured without Executive interfer
ence than with it. They are contending
for the power of the Executive to lay
hi# hand upon the vote when he *p
proache# the ballot-box to choose his
representative, to bribe him with office,
to intimidate him hy threat# of prose
cution of in distant and expensive tri
bunals, to seize the muniment* of hi*
title to suffrage, to arrest hi* person and
to confiscate his estate hy the mi|>o*ilinn
of ruinous fine* and forfeitures lor tech
nical offence*.
I am not one of those who would
willingly obstruct the Executive in the
exercise of any of his constitutional
functions or deprive him of any of hi#
constitutional power*; hut lam one of
those who believe that every attempt to
extend his authority beyond the limit*
prescribed in the Constitution ought to
he resisted hy every lawful mean* at
our command.
.Sir, without these odious law# the in
fluence of the Executive department
upon the politic* of the country is *1
most irresistible. It command* the
army and navy; it direct* in a great
measure the financial policy of the
country; it disburse* more than ♦150,-
000,000 of the people's money every
year in delraying the ordinary expense#
of the Government ; it appoint* all the
judges of all the court* ; it direct* the
execution of all the laws, and therefore
controls all criminal ami penal prose
cutions, and it distribute* among it* ad
herents more than one hundred thou
sand office* and employment* with em
oliiment* amounting annually to many
millions of dollars. These are vast
powers, and when vou add them the
authority given hy these statute# to send
thousand* of *ul>ordinate executive off!
cerw to the polling place# throughout
the country at every election for Repre
sentative* to judge of the qualifications
of voters, to arrest them without war
j rant, and to deprive them of the right
of suffrage for whatever the officer may
ohoose to consider an offense, you have
completed the full measure of Kxecu
live | >ower to control the organisation
and action of the House.
If any gentleman will reflect for a
moment upon the peculiar and impor
taut functions performed by thi* body
in the operations of the Government
he cannot fail to realize the vast impor
tance of preserving iu perfect freedom
1 and independence. Under the Conati
, lotion we posse-.* the sole power toorigi
j unto hills to raise revenue hy luxation
upon the people ami to appropriate the
public moneys. That money, when
raised and appropriated, is to he dis
j burned bv the Executive department,
which udda wry largely to its power
and influence over the people. Inch
dental to this, and necessitrily involved
1 in it, is the power of the House to deter
mine whether there shall or shall not
he an army and navy main tain ted at
the t-üblic expense and commanded hy
the Executive. Under the Consitution
this llou .e possesses the sole jxjwer to
i originate impeachments against the
President himself and other officer* of
the United States ; and in case of a fail
ure to elect by the electoral colleges,
this House, voting by States, bus the
sole | oner to choose tho President.
Here then arc four great powers belong
ing exclusively to the House of Itepre
sentatives, in the exercise ol which the
Executive may be directly affected
either in his person or in his office.
If he can control the organisation of
this body by dictating the choice of its
* members gvnerally or influencing the
i election of a sufficient number to hold
the balanco of pjower, he thereby con
trols it* action on ail these vital mat
ler*. Ho may determine, to a very
largo extent, the amount and fortn of
taxation upon the people and the
amount and the object* for which ap
propriation* shall be made; he tnay de
termine the size and organization of the
army and navy and the purposes for
which they shall he used ; ho may pre
vent his own impeachment for tho very
corruptions which givo bun immunity,
or secure the impeachment of a rival ;
and he may, in the contingency 1 have
mentioned, provide for In* own re-elec
tion to the Executive office. It is not
my purpose to elaborate these jirojmsi
lioti". Their truth is too obvious to ad
mit of argument, and the dangerous
character of the power which the Ex
ecutive would exercise in these instan
ces i* too nppurent to require illustra
tion. Do gentlemen on the other side
seriously contemplate the permanent
maintenance of a system of laws calcu
lated to produce such results? Can it
he possible that they place such a low
estimate ujam the intelligence ol the
people and so little reliance tijain their
virtue and love of liberty as to #upp>o#c
that they will ever rest satisfied until
the stain of these odious enactments
shall !• effaced from the pages of the
statute book ?
I submit to every gentleman whether
tins is or ought to be a mere party que#-
lion ; whether all the Representatives
of the j-eople ought not to unite a* one
man and declare that law* which con
fer this extraordinary and dangerous
power upon the Executive ought to l<e
no longer continued ujan the statute
book, if time would permit, Mr. Chair
man. I would like to CIJOM! at length
some of the method* by which I Ins
power ha* been executed; but fbe
warning already given upon Ilia floor
flu* afternoon admonishes me that it
will fa. necessary to confine my remarks,
if pxvssiblc, within the limits prescribed
by the rule.
Why, sir, or.e of most serious
complain!* made sgafnst <"harle 11.
was that lie exercised an undue influ
ence over elections by means of sheriff*
appointed by himself: but what are a
few sheriff's in England compared with
the thousands of supx-rvisor* and depu
ty marshal" who may ]* ap|>ointed with
out limit under this law by the Execu
tive department? In l t 7f>eleven thou
sand six hundred and fifteen spiecial
deputy marshals were appointed to at
tend the election" oT the i>eo|,lo, and in
one instance at least as many a one
hundred and fifty-five were stationed at
a single polling place. Nearly six thou
sand supervisors were apjointed to
officiate at the same election. At a
similar election in 1878 nearly five
thousand spiecial deputy marshals were
appointed and over four thousand *u
pierviaor*. In almost every instance,
at least so far as the denuty marshal*
were concerned, these officers were the
partisans of the Administration, and
although they were paid for their ser
vice* out of the common treasury of
the people, it i* a well known fact that
they contributed all in their power—
and in some instances at least even to
the extent of abusing their jaiwers—to
assist their party friend* in chooing
niembo-*of this House in political ac
cord with the Executive. Nine of the
cities to which these executive officers
were sent elect twenty seven Repre
sentative* every two year* —a sufficient
number under ordinary circumstances
to control our action here upon all pxe
litical matters; and yet these extraordi
nary law* apply to all the cities in the
Union containing over twenty thousand
inhabitants. It matters little to the
people whether the interference in their
elections i* effected through the agency
of the soldier with his inusket or the
marshal with hi* club. It is the inter
ference itself, and not its niero form, of
which they complain.
I cannot go into anything like a satis
factory di*-u*ion of the particular pro
visions contained in these statutes. It
is sufficient to say generally that they
authorise the appointment of special
deputy marshals without limit as to
numlier; that it is made their duty to
attend the places of registration and
the places of voting ; to challenge any
citizen whnn qualification* they "may
doubt," for that is the language of the
statute*; and that they are authorized
fo arrest any citizen or any officer of a
Stale government, with or without pro
cess, whenever they may think that the
citizen or the officer ha* violated or is
about to violate any law of the United
Slate# or any law of the Htate in rela
tion to election*. They are sent there
for the ostensible piirtmse of preserving
what is called by the late Attorney
General "the peace of the United
Htate# to protect the voter before the
election in his personal freedom, and to
see that he is not molested before the
election on account of any vote that he
may be about to give, or afler the elec
tion on account of any vote that he may
have already given. The supervisor*
are authorised 'and em|*>wered, by one
of the section* which we now seek to
repeal, to "personally scrutinise, count
and canvaas each t>al!ot in their elec
tion district or voting precinct cast,
whatever may indorsement on
the ballot or in whatever box It may
have been places! or be found so that
if the ballots for tho local Htate officer*
"re dopxisUod in separate bo from
those containing l '"' for Repre
sentative* in Congress, it i* made the
duty of these officer# to seize and open
those boxes and to count the ballot*
contained in tliem. Extraordinary in
struction* were given hy the late Attor
ney General Taft to the United States
marshals in 187 C, and which were, hy a
mrange mingling of the civil and mili
tary authorities, promulgated through
the War Department in the form of a
general order.
Without stopping now to comment at
length upon his extraordinary construe
tion of statutes, 1 desire to call the at
tention of the committee to the fact that
they contain a clear misapplication of
tin 1 opinion of Attorney tieneral Cusli
! ing in relation to the right of the mar-
I shals to summon a jvnurr comilatuM. It is
; not true that Mr. Gushing ever gave
any opinion to the effect thut the mar
shals had the right to summon either
the citizen or the soldier tr> assist him
as a pottr rottnlalut in the performance
of any duty except the execution of a
process issued from the courts of the
I luted Ktates. No Attorney General,
•o fur as 1 know, except the one who
issued these instructions, has ever de
cided that a marshal had power to rum
mon h)-oa*r to assist in "preventing dis
order." that is, in keeping the peace.
Mr. I aft claimed that it was the duty of
these officers to preserve " the peace
of the United Stales," a thing which I
venture to say was never heard of until
this document w> promulgated. J had
occasion the other duy, in the discussion
of another matter, to say something in
relation to the respective powers of the
Slate governments and the '"nited
States government in matter of mere
police regulation, and I desire now
simply to call attention to what has
Keen said hy others upon the same sub
ject in order that their opinions may
be presented to the committer; in a
compact and convenient form. A dis
, tinguished judge in Vermont, Judge
Redfleld, says;
This power >.f the Htat- extends to tlx
protection <>f the lives, limbs, health, c< m
fort slid quiet of ah persons and protection
of all property within the .State.
■fudge Cooley says:
In the American constitutional system
the p-ower to establish the ordinary regula
tions ■ 1 poll, e has beef! left with the in
dividual States and cannot be assumed bv
the National Go-.i rmnt-nl.
It is a power to preserve domestic
order st all times and at all places
within the limits of the State,'and con
sequcntly it can he exercised hy the
State, and by the State alone, for the
prevention of violence or crime or, in
other words, to keep the peace. Many
years ago Mr. Justice Story, in deliver
ing an opinion in the Supreme fVsurt of
the United States in a great leading
case, said :
To guard, however, against any feasible
misconstruction of our views it is f.r-|-r
to stan- that we are by no means to be un
derstood in any manner whatsoever to
doubt or to interfere with the pnlicsjinvsr
belonging to the Slate* in virtue of their
general sovereignty. That js.lice power
extends over all subjects within the terri
torial limits of the Slates and has never
Keen conceded to the United Slates.
Gertainlv, if there can ever he a time
when the authority of the United States
surrounds and protects one of its offi
cers to the exclcsion of all other juris
dictions It must l>e when he is engaged
in the very act of executing a process
issued from its court". And yet the
present Chief Justice of the Supreme
'"ourt. in delivering sn opinion in 1876,
uses the following language:
True it may sometimes happen that a
person is amenable to both jurisdictions
for one and the same act—
Meaning the jurisdiction of the State
and the United Mate*.
Thus if a marshal of the United States
II unlawfully resisted whlle executing the
process of the courts within a State and
the resistance is accompanied by an assault
on the officer, the sovereignty of the Unites]
Stal<* ts vioiaUd hy the resistance and that
; of the Stale by the breach of the peace in
the assault.
And again, in the course of the same
j opinion, the Ghief Justice aaid :
It is no more the duty or within the pow
er of the Unite.) Stan* to punish for a con
spiracy, to falsely imprison or murder with
in a Slate than it would be U> punish for
false imprisonment or murder itself.
Showing clearly that in the opinion
] of the court a breach of the peace as
•urh cannot constitute an offense against
'he Government of the United State*.
Very different from the opinion of Mr.
Taft was that of the present Secretary
'of State while Attorney General under
the administration of Andrew Johnson.
In the letter of instruction sent by him
to the United States Marshal for the
northern district of Florida on the 20th
of August, IHf.ss, he stated the law upon
the subject as follow* :
While, however, the law give* you this
"power to e/imm*nd all necessary assist
ance," and the military within your dis
trict are not exempt from obligation to
obey, in common with all thecitir.cn*, your
summon* tn cases of necessity, you will be
particular to observe that this high and re
sponsible authority is given to the marshal
only in aid of his duty "to execute through
out the district all lawful precepts directed
to him and issued under the authority of
the United Slats*," and only incase of ne
cessity for this extraordinary aid. The
military tiertons obeying this summons of
the marshal will act in subordination and
obedience to the civil officer, the marshal,
in whoae aid in tho execution of process
they are called, and only to tho effect of se
curing St* execution.
The special duty and authority In the
execution of process issued to you must not
be confounded with the duty and authori
ty of suppressing disorder and preserving
the peace, which, under out Government,
belongs to the civil authorities of the States
and not the civil authorities of the United
Stales. Nor are this special duty and au
thority of the marshal in executing proem*
issued to htm to be confounded with the
authority and duty of the President of the
United State* in the specific cases of the
Constitution and under the statutes to pro
tect the Stales against domestic violence,
or with his authority and duty under
special statute* to employ military force In
subduing combination* in resistance to the
law* of the United States; Tor neither of
theee dutiew or authorities is shared by the
subordinate officers ol the Government,
except when and as the same may be
specifically communicated to them by* the
Proudest,
Thi* in the Inn gunge of a grcst lawyer
and ii practical stiif.-i-rnan who under-
Hand* am] appreciate* the character of
I the institutions under which he liner,
; mid I submit it without further cotu
ment to the consideration of gentlemen
j who are contending here and elsewhere
, for the {tower of special deputy marshals,
j "to keep the peace and prererre order"
I in a State on the day of election or any
other day. They ran bane no such
power, and any attempt to confer it
, upon them i* simply an attempt to
! usurp the rightful authority of the
j Stale*.
It i* not possible for me to devote any
' considerable time to a recital of the
many abuse* that have la-en committed
| under thin law, hut I desire to ray what
: i* known to the whole country, that at
; the Congressional election of 1878 in the
i city of New York those who controlled
| ami directed this ingenious and oi.pren
| ive i-ohtical machinery brought it*
whole force to bear with crushing effect
I against a single class of citizens, ftllHtl
j can citizens of foreign birth. In May,
j IS"*, the Chief Supervisor of Klertiona
' m that city caused one of his clerks or
j assistant* to swear to a single complaint
I against iOO persons of foreign birth
1 who held certificates of naturalization
issued from the Supreme ami Superior
courts in 1868, and on which they Jiad
regularly registered and voted at every
election since that time. On this com
plaint the same Supervisor of Elections,
a* clerk of the f nited Mate* (>urt. is
sued wariant* returnable before
himself as Commissioner of the I.'nited
States (hurt. Afterward it *e,-nis to
have been discovered by this officer that
these warrants were illegal by reason of
tbe fact that the complaint contained
more than one name and thereupon
, they were withdrawn, but immediately
afterward he caused more com
plaints to be made and issued warrants
upon them in the same way. Many
! persons were arrested under this prr>ceaa
and about 3,400 naturalized citizens, in
order to escape from this {.artisan per
secution, actually surrendered their
papers. ,1 uI a few days before the elec
tion in November he caused the same
: clerk or assistant to swear to 3,2(i0 more
j complaint* They were *worri to in
• package*, many of them on the Sunday
preceding the election, and during the
night preceding the election warrant*
were made out against th>* |<ersons
named in the complaint* and placed in
the hand* of the supervisors of election
at the various voting place*, to be de
livered to the deputy marshals next
morning, in order that they might be
executed when the person* named in
them should appear for the purpose of
voting. Among the instructions given
by the chief supervisor to his subordi
nate* was the following :
In cae of j*-rs< n who present themselves
to v..te, where a warrant has been | re
viously issued, you will we that *uc h j-er
sof.s are arrested upon the warrant upon so
presenting themselves and la-fore voting.
This instruction wa* faithfully obey
<•<l. and on the day of election hundred*
of naturalized citizens who possessed aM
the qualifications required bv the con
stitution and law* of the State of New
York were arrested at the polls, dragged
away by these deputy marshals, and de
-1 prived of the right of suffrage Tbo
pretense upon whioh these outrage*
j wore committed was that the record*
of naturalization kept by the Sujerior
Court of New York in the year IW>B
were defective and that therefore the
certificates were void. The truth was
that precisely the same kind of record
and no nth<< had been kept in that
Court for a period of fifteen year*, un
der the administrations of nineteen dif
ferent judge* of both johtical parties,
the Hon. Edward* Pierrejont, late Min
ister to the Court of St. .lame*. Wing
one of them ; that between fifty and *ixty
thousand j>er*on* had during that time
Wen naturalized in precisely the same
manner a* these persecuted men. and
many of iftim had been voting and ex
errising all tbe other rights of citizen
ship without question Ipr twenty year*,
ami that Wfnre these arrest* were made
a State judge, in an able and elaWrato
opinion, had expressly decided that the
record was sufficient and the naturali
: zation* valid. Notwithstanding these
facts, about which there can W no dis
pute, these nine or ten thousand per
son* who had in good faith procured
their pa{>er* in IMVH were selected to W
the victim* of * vile a political conspir
acy and persecution as wa* ever set on
foot in the history of any country.
Certainly no such crusade against the
political rights of any class of cilisens
wa* ever before inaugurated in this
country, and none ever had lea* excuse
or justification. In otne instance* the
p*|>er* of the citizen were seized by
! these Federal officer* when he catne u>
register and were retained until the
election was over.
The totol absence of sufficient legal
cause for these extraordinary proceed
ing* is demonstrated by the admitted
fact that although thousand* of war
rant* were issued and hundred* of ar
rest# were made, not a single conviction
wa* ever obtained, and indeed not a
single one was ever prosecuted to a final
hearing. I have said that there were leg
ally qualified voters, and a brief reference
to the judgment of the I'nited States
Circuit Court in one of the cases will es
tablish the truth of the statement. Una
of the men arrested, peter C-oleman by
n*me, appears to have Wen so poor and
friendless a* to W unable either to pro
cure hail or otherwise secure hi* release,
and consequently he was thrown into
jail, and in the excitement and confu
sion of the occasion was overlooked un
til some time after the election. A
writ of hat.es* corpus was sued out and
he was brought Wfure .fudge Itlatchfoni.
who alter an clgjiorate investigation of
the whole question discharged him from
imprison menu
The evidence taken by a committee
of this House during the last Congress
and rejtorted In Miscellaneous Docu
ment No. 23 shows that per
son# who were naturalised in the Su
perior Court in 1868 registered and voted
in the city of New York at the election
in 1876, but tbe result of the system of
intimidation inaugurated and carried
on by the chief Supervisor of Election*
and hia subordinate* waa that only 1,-
240 such persons voted at the Congres
sional election in 1878. It ia therefore
almost self evident that about 8,000 vo
ters, nearly all of whom were Demo
[Continued on 4(A pogt. J