duty, and makes a vacancy; to elect Thurman Further proof of their Revolutionary pur. President of the Senate: if Tilden took the oath at the right time-as many believe he did, and the statement to that effect has never been denied by him-to induct him into the Presidency; and if he did not, then the "vacancy" to be filled by Thurman. That some such movements were in contemplation is evident from what leaked out every now and then from persons supposed to know the hidden purposes of the revolutionists. "WASHINGTON, June 14.-A fact which may throw some light upon the real purposes actuating those who engineered the Potter resolution through the House has just come out here. It seems, according to excellent Democratic authority, that several months before the Potter resolution was passed, Mr. Manton Marble and General Barlow approached leading Democratic members of the House of Representatives and men prominent in the party, and urged them to begin active measures for ousting Président Hayes as soon as the Democrats should secure control of both Houses of Congress, One reason which they urged was, that it would be a good piece of party strategy, because if Governor Tilden was given two years of the present Presidential term his ambition would be satisfied, and he could easily be put out of the way for 1880. The consultations of these gentlemen, who were known to be working in the interest of Governor Tilden, all indicate that the main purpose of the present movement, in the minds of those who were responsible for it, has been to remove, President Hayes from the office he now holds. Now that public opinion has driven the Democrats to declare that the President's title cannot be attacked, those who formerly talked of putting him out through suits in the Supreme Court, or by joint resolution recognizing Governor Tilden, are almost all talking of impeachment instead." Another plan for putting Hayes out and The Washington Capital, Aug. 11, 1878, a paper supposed at that time to have special sources of information as to the designs of the Democratic revolutionary leaders, said, that "after the 4th of March Allan G. Thurman will be President of the Senate, and prepared to fill one of the two vacancies," which certain persons— poses-Springer's declarations. That the Democratic leaders were bent upon declaring the Potter investigation allegations proven; that they intended to take action; that the action which they proposed to take they intended by the mere action of a Demowas in the line of impeachment; and that cratic majority of both Houses-should they then control both Houses to declare the offces of both the President and Vice President vacant upon the presentations of the articles of impeachment to the Senate, is rendered clear as daylight by the statement of Springer, Democratic member of the Potter committee, in an interview (July 1878) with the reporter of a Western paper, wherein he is represented as saying that enough had already been brought out by the committee to "warrant the impeachment of President Hayes, and there will be no trouble on that score, as the Democrats will have a majority of the Senate after the 4th of March next.' And the following telegram in a New York paper of August 5, 1878, is confirmatory not only of Springer's conclusions, but as to those of others of his Democratic friends on the Potter committee: "WASHINGTON, August 4.-Mr. Springer, of the Potter committee, talks very freely of the case,' as he calls it, which to his mind has already been established by the Potter committee. He regards it as one which will not only justify impeachment, but which demands it. He thinks the Wormley Hotel conference, in connection with the subsequent action of the Louisiana commission, quite sufficient to sustain articles of impeachment, and he fully expects the House to present them at an early day. Such talk doubtless reflects the views of several members of the Potter committee." PART XVII. of Why the Impeachment Plan was Abandoned-Rebuke from the North-New Tactics - Forcing the Extra Session Political Riders-The New Revolution"Starving Out," instead "Shooting Down" the Government-Extra Session Threats. Had the Congressional elections of 1878 resulted in Democratic gains instead of heavy "Are busy demonstrating to the people to exist in Democratic losses, the revolutionary prothe President's and Vice President's offices. This will gramme above indicated would undoubtedly not elect Mr. Tilden-he not being eligible through a have been carried out to the letter. strange defect in the law which makes it necessary for South, by bulldozing and other scandalous the President-elect to be sworn in at a certain date after being elected. This is in part the scheme for a strong methods, the Democratic representation in the Government, conceived and organized by that form of House was so largely increased that it was alcapital which net-works our land in the shape of rail- most "solidly " Democratic, but in the North roads, and has for its managers the boldest, most un- Democratic representation fell off to such an scrupulous and efficient knaves of all that class of financial schemers that grow rich on other men's earn- extent that despite the increase in Southern ings. It was their intent to seat one of their number-membership, there was a bare Democratic Mr. Tilden himself-in the Presidency, but they will accept Allan G. Thurman. To them the smoke that indicates the fire upon the plains is not distant. The danger is at hand, and they seek to fight fire with fire. * * * This is neither impeachable nor revolutionary, and is far stronger and efficient than any military Wall street thieving organization, with Grant as its figure head, that will come in just thirty days too late to be of use." In the majority in the whole House! Political rider plan inaugurated—Forcing | Democrats upon the power of the Executivethe Extra Session-Threats of Senators Beck and Thurman, In the closing session of 1878-9, the Democratic House, looking ahead to the Presidential election of 1880, and determined, if possible, to afford every possible opportunity for a dishonest and fraudulent count by their friends both South and North, determined, in caucus, to put upon two of the great appropriation bills, certain "riders," to wit: upon the Army Appropriation Bill a rider declaring that troops shall not be used at the polls; and upon the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriation Bill, two provisions, one repeating the jurors test-oath; the other repeating the essential provisions of the Congressional Election Law, under which the purity of the ballot box is preserved. The Democratic House tacked these riders on, but a Republican Senate refused to permit them to remain on. The matter of disagreement went to a committee of conference, and, under the instructions of the Democratic caucus, the Democrats on that Committee refused to report them favorably unless the riders remained on, and the bills failing, an extra session was necessitated. Failing to coerce the Republican Senate, their next move was to coerce a Republican President, and that the whole thing was deliberately planned, is shown by the utterances, not alone of Democratic members of the House, but also by those of two distinguished Democratic Senators; said Senator Beck: "The Democratic conferees on the part of the House seemed determined that unless those rights were secured to the people in the bill sent to the Senate they would refuse, under their constitutional right, to make appropriations to carry on the Government if the dominant majority in the Senate insisted upon the maintenance of these laws and refused to consent to their repeal. * * *If, however, the President of the United States, in the exercise of the power invested in him, should see fit to veto the bills thus presented to him, * * * then I have no doubt those same amendments will be again made part of the appropriation bills, and it will be for the President to determine whether he will block the wheels of Government and refuse to accept necessary appropriations rather than allow the representatives of the people to repeal odious laws which they regard as subversive of their rights and privileges. * * * Whether that course is right or wrong it will be adopted, and I have no doubt adhered to, no matter what happens with the appropriation bills." Said Senator Thurman : "We claim the right, * ** to say we will not grant the money of the people unless there is a redress of grievances." The starvation plan―The veto power. The consequence of this spirit was the memorable extra session of 1879, which was consumed in vain revolutionary efforts on the part of the two Houses of Congress-the Senate having in the meantime become Democratic-to starve the Government into a surrender of the high constitutional power of the veto. In another chapter the vetoes of the extra session will be found to give the history of each of the many abortive attacks thus made by the upon that very veto power which their own National conventions of 1856 and 1860 declared sacred in these words: President the qualified veto power by which he is That we are decidedly opposed to taking from the enabled, under restrictions and responsibilities amply sufficient to guard the public interests, to suspend the passage of a bill whose merits cannot secure the approval of two-thirds of the Senate and House of Rep resentatives until the judgment of the people can be obtained thereon. General Garfield states the whole case in a nutshell. The case was succinctly stated by General Garfield, when, in his speech of the 29th March, 1879, he said to the revolutionary Democratic House: "The last act of Democratic domination in this Caperhaps heroic. Then the Democratic party said to pitol, eighteen years ago, was striking and dramatic, the Republicans, If you elect the man of your choice as President of the United States we will shoot your try, refusing to be coerced by threats or violence, voGovernment to death;' and the people of this counted as they pleased, and lawfully elected Abraham Lincoln President of the United States. "Then your leaders, though holding a majority in the draw from their seats and fling down the gage of mortal other branch of Congress, were heroic enough to withbattle. We called it rebellion; but we recognized it as courageous and manly to avow your purpose, take all the risks, and fight it out on the open field. Notwithment was saved. Year by year since the war ended, standing your utmost efforts to destroy it, the Governthose who resisted you have come to believe that you have finally renounced your purpose to destroy, and are willing to maintain the Government. In that belief you have been permitted to return to power in the two Houses. "To-day, after eighteen years of defeat, the book of your domination is again opened, and your first act stroy the confidence which your professions of patriotawakens every unhappy memory and threatens to deism inspired. You turned down a leaf of the history that recorded your last act of power in 1861, and you ning a second chapter at the same page; not this time have now signalized your return to power by beginby a heroic act that declares war on the battle-field, but do not consent to let you tear certain laws out of the you say if all the legislative powers of the Government statute-book, you will not shoot our Government to death as you tried to do in the first chapter; but you declare that if we do not consent against our will, if you cannot coerce in independent branch of this Government against its will, to allow you tear from the statute-books some laws put there by the will of the people, you will starve the Government to death. [Great applause on the Republican side.] "Between death on the field and death by starvation, I do not know that the American people will see any great difference. The end, if successfully reached, would be death in either case. Gentlemen, you have it in your power to kill this Government; you have it in your power, by withholding these two bills, to smite the nerve-centres of our Constitution with the paralysis of death; and you have declared you purpose to do this, if you cannot break down that fundamental element of free consent which up to this hour has always ruled in the legislation of this Government." Extra session threats of 1879 by Representatives Hurd, Muldrow, Singleton, Turner, Kitchin, O'Connor, Chalmers, McMahon, Sparks, Tucker, and Blackburn. The following extracts from speeches made during the extra session will be serviceable, as showing the bitter, uncompromising spirit of the revolutionary party-which, though it came to grief at the time through the firmness of President Hayes, will be found ready to spring up again at another time, and in another and even more serious shape, unless the people at this election rebuke it by an electoral majority for General Garfield that shall overwhelm them and their treasonable schemes. Representative Hurd, of Ohio, April 2, 1879, said: "It is objected to these measures of legislation which we propose that there is a possibility by our passing these laws of restraining the veto power of the President. * ** I deny that the President of the United States has any right to participate in the legislation of this country." Representative Muldrow, of Mississippi, April 3, 1879, said: "If the gentleman from Ohio is correct in his assumption that the Presiden t will veto these repeals, then, I repeat, let the responsibility be upon him and the Republican party. If there is revolution in that, they are the revolutionists; they are the party and he is the officer whose veto will thwart the will of the people as expressed by their representa: ves in Congress, and he will, for partizan purposes, exercise a constitutional prerogative in the interest of tyranny and in violation of every principle of liberty and freedom." Representative Singleton, of Mississippi, April 4, 1879, said: "For myself, President or no President, veto or no veto, I am prepared to fight upon this line until the work proposed is done, effectually done, whatever of time, labor, or expense it may involve.' Representative Turner, of Kentucky, 'Well, sir, if Mr. Hayes vetoes this (Army) bill on account of the sixth section guarding the right of suffrage, then the responsibility wil re on his shoulders, and not on ours, for star..ng the Army. I do not believe Mr. Hayes will veto the bill on account of the sixth section. But if he does, and persists in that veto, and thereby starves the Army of the United States, then let the responsibility rest where it belongs, on the head of the President, for vetoing a bill, right, proper, and constitutional, passed by a majority of the representatives of the people in the exercise of their constitutional rights." Representative Chalmers, of Mississippi, April 2, 1879, said: cause the Republican party in its arrogance refuse to Sir, it is said that the Army shall eat nothing be eat humble pie. You threaten to starve the Govern ment to death because you have grown so great that you cannot even do what is right if it happens to be demanded by the majority of an opposite party. "Now I do not believe that the Government is going to die; but if it should die from the issue now pre sented, upon whose shoulders will the responsibility rest? *** Andrew Johnson on that trying occasion set an example to his Republican friends which they would do well to remember now. Rather than see the wheels of this Government stopped he signed that bill; but he signed it under protest, and thus made his appeal to the country. "It is deemed necessary to make another appeal to the people on the question now at issue, the Republi can President can make his choice-he can either for low the example of Andrew Johnson, or he can, as the gentleman from Ohio said, destroy this Government without firing a single hostile gun. It is for him, not for us, to say which course he will choose. *** If free Government must die, and die at the hands of such a President as this, then the Democratic party can look in the face of the expiring goddess of liberty and say: "Shake not thy gory locks at me; Thou canst not say I did it." " Representative Sparks, of Illinois, said: "I deny, therefore, that the President has any legis lative power. He has the power to arrest; only the power to arrest. Now let us take the case before us. It is insisted that the President is attempted to be coerced by the proposed legislation and that this action is revolutionary. Now, sir, we pass a law. All appropriations of money from the Treasury must be made by law. We pass this law appropriating nearly $27,000,000. In that law we make provision that the Army, for which the appropriation is made, shall not be used to keep the peace at the polls' in the vari ous precincts and polling places throughout the United States, The President chooses, if you please, to arrest it. He says: I arrest this law and return it to Congress with my objection.' What do we do? I do not know what gentlemen generally will do; but my idea in this particular case would be to say to the President, Very well, sir; if you do not need this Representative Kitchin, of North Carolina, law, why should we want it? We certainly have the April 3, said: "The honorable gentleman need not remind this House of the evil results that righ flow from the anticipated act of the President; it will neither drive nor lead from an honest and faithful discharge of duty; we will perform our duty to the country, and let them assume the responsibility of defeating will of the majority and, if you please, as they say, destroying the Government. I plant myself on this rock and say, in the language of the valiant Fitz-James. Come one, come all; this rock shall fly Representative O'Connor, of South Carolina, said: "We have been thus early convoked here by the Fresident to furnish supplies to run the Government, just as we were prepared to do in the last Congress until impeded and opposed Ly the Senate. The representatives of the people, who are the sovereigns of this country and hold the purse, do not intend to be coerced. It is our province and our prerogative, it is our duty, to see before we give the taxes of the people that all grievances are redressed." constitutional power to let it alone; and, Mr. Presi dent, as you have chosen to arrest it by your positive act of objection or veto, all right; now just let the subject drop.' But then he will say, 'But, gentlemen, that will not do; this law must be passed; I must have this law.' 'Well, then,' we answer, 'why did you not take it, sir, and make it effective after we had passed it and presented it to you? Because,' he says, it had some provision in it that was objec tionable to me.' 'Well, sir, what do you propose to do? Why, I propose that you shall pass a law unobjectionable to me; in other words, you shall pass the kind of law that I want you to pass." Representative Tucker, of Va., April 3, 1879, said: "I tell you, gentlemen of the House of Representatives, the Army dies on the 30th day of June, unless we resuscitate it by legislation. And what is the question here on this bill? Will you resuscitate the Army after the 30th of June, with the power to use it as keepers of the polls? That is the question. It is not a question of repeal. It is a question of re-enactment. If you do not appropriate this money, there will be no Army after the 30th of June to be used at the polls. The only way to secure an Army at the polls is to ap * * * propriate the money. Will you appropriate the money substantial point that would save them the for the Army in order that they may be used at the polls? mortification of an absolute back-down from We say no, a thousand times no. The gentlemen on the other side say there must be no coercion. their former imperious revolutionary stand. Of whom? Of the President? But what right has the But in this again, they failed. Beaten at all President to coerce us? There may be coercion one points, they determined to raise the "fraud" way or the other. He demands an unconditional supply. We say we will give him no supply but upon con-issue, and under cover of that in the Presiditions. *** When, therefore, vicious laws have dential campaign raise such a dust that their fastened themselves upon the statute-book which own recent disgraceful history, as well as imperil the liberty of the people, this House is bound their still existing revolutionary purpose, to say it will appropriate no money to give effect to should be lost sight of. The National Demosuch laws until and except upon condition that they cratic Convention of 1880 responded with are repealed. [Applause on the Democratic side.] * We will give him the Army on a single condition that alacrity, and brought it to the front as the it shall never be used or be present at the polls when an election is held for members of this House, or in paramount issue before the people. It is any presidential election, or in any State or muni- upon this then that they hope to ride into cipal election. Clothed thus with un- power and place and plunder, by the aid of questioned power, bound by clear duty, to expunge Indiana and New York, added to that "solid these vicious laws from the statute-book, following a South," which Wade Hampton swears by. constitutional method sanctioned by venerable precedents in English history, we feel that we have the undoubted right, and are beyond cavil in the right, in declaring that with our grant of supply there must be a cessation of these grievances, and we make these appropriations conditioned on securing a free ballot and fair juries for our citizens." * * * Representative Blackburn, of Kentucky, "May I not assure that gentleman and his associates that the dominant party of this Congress, the ruling element of this body, is also equally determined that until their just demands are satisfied, * * * this side of the Chamber, which has demonstrated its power, never means to yield or surrender until this Congress shall have died by virtue of its limitation. [Applause on the Democratic side-] We will not yield. A principle cannot be compromised. It may be surrendered; but that can only be done by its advocates giving proof to the world that they are cravens and cowards, lacking the courage of their own conviction. We cannot yield, and will not surrender. * * * * * The "fraud issue played out-The real object discerned-Rule or ruin-The answer of the North to the "Solid South Oregon, Vermont, Maine-No mistake this time. But no such false issue can go down" with the North. The intellect of the North sees clearly the meaning of all the long list of revolutionary manoeuverings which have been conceived in the scheming brains of unrepentant Confederate brigadiers, and worked out, as far as was practicable, by the aid of their few Northern allies. The North perceives where, unless promptly stopped, all this will end-that the election of Hancock means a reconstruction of the United States Supreme Court, with the ensuing overturn of the Constitutional amendments, or judicial constructions thereof, equivalent to their overthrow-that it means the bull-doz "Now, sir, the issue is laid down, the gage of battle is delivered. Lift it when you please; we are willing to appeal to that sovereign arbiter that the gentleman 'so handsomely lauded, the American people, to decide being of the North as well as the South—that it tween us. "I do not mean to issue a threat. * * *But 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 he would. I beg you to believe he will not be coerced by threats nor intimidated by parade of power. He must stand upon his conviction and here we will all stand. He who dallies is a dastard, and he who doubts is damned [Great applause on the Democratic side.] means 80,000 Federal offices suddenly filled by raw Democrats, without regard to fitness for the discharge of a multiplicity of delicate and arduous duties that it means utter disarrangement in the smooth working of the Governmental machinery-that it means doubtful policy as to all essential matters, save two; that it means a fixed policy as to Southern domination which will bring ruin to Republican institutions, and a fixed policy as to free trade which will bring ruin upon our manufacturers and laboring men-that it means, in short, both political and financial wreck and disaster. The North sees this already. Oregon saw it first, and Vermont and Maine have followed with increased Re publican majorities, which mean that this is à life-and-death struggle between the forces of Freedom and of Slavery under a new name, and that there must this time be no close elecfor the Presidency-that it must be so large toral majority for the Republican candidate as to awe the revengeful and rapacious "soli South," and deter its leaders in Congress from attempting to count him out, and from thu precipitating upon this now happy and prosperous and free people all the incarnate horrors of a bloody, heart-rending, desolating, civil war. CHAPTER IV. Special Session of 1879-The Veto Messages, etc. PART I. "SECTION 2002. No military or naval officer, or other person engaged in the civil, military, or naval ser vice of the United States, shall order, bring, keep, o armed men at the place where any general or special The President's call for the Spe- have under his authority or control, any troops or cial Session-Why it was neces-election is held in any State, unless is be necessary to sary to issue it. Following is the President's call for the extra or special session: tives: « Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representa"The failure of the last Congress to make the requisite appropriation for legislative and judicial purposes, for the expenses of the several executive departments of the Government, and for the support of the Army, has made it necessary to call a special session of the Forty-sixth Congress. "The estimates of the appropriations needed, which were sent to Congress by the Secretary of the Treasury at: he opening of the last session, are renewed, and are herewith transmitted to both the Senate and the House of Representatives. "Regretting the existence of the emergency which requires a special session of Congress at a time when it is the general judgment of the country that the public welfare will be best promoted by permanency in our legislation and by peace and rest, I commend these few necessary measures to your considerate at tention. ́ ́ RUTHERFORD B. HAYES. "WASHINGTON, March 19, 1879." PART II. repel the armed enemies of the United States, or to keep the peace at the polls.' SECTION 5528. Every officer of the army or navy, or other person in the civil, military or naval service of the United States, who orders, brings, keeps or has unat any place where a general or special election is held der his authority or control, any troops or armed men armed enemies of the United States, or to keep the in any State, unless such force be necessary to repel peace at the polls, shall be fined not more than $5,000, and suffer imprisonment at hard labor not less than three months nor more than five years.' "The amendment proposed to this statute in the bill before me, omits from both of the foregoing sections the words or to keep the peace at the polls." The effect of the adoption of this amendment may be consid ered "First. Upon the right of the United States Government to use military force to keep the peace at the elections for members of Congress; and, civil authority, to protect these elections from violence "Second. Upon the right of the Government, by and fraud. quoted, the following provisions of law relating to the use of the military power at the elections are now in force: "In addition to the sections of the statute above SECTION 2003. No officer of the army or navy of the United States shall prescribe or fix, or attempt to prescribe or fix, by proclamation, order, or otherwise, the qualifications of voters in any State, or in any manner interfere with the freedom of any election in any State, or with the exercise of the free right of suffrage Veto of the Army Appropriation | in any State. Message from the President of the United States to the "TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: "I have maturely considered the important questions presented by the bill entitled An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1880, and for other purposes, and I now return it to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, with my objections to its approval. "The bill provides, in the usual form, for the appropriations required for the support of the Army during the next fiscal year. If it contained no other provisions, it would receive my prompt approval. It includes, however, further legislation, which, attached as it is to appropriations which are requisite for the efficient performance of some of the most necessary duties of the Government, involves questions of the gravest character. The sixth section of the bill is amendatory of the statute now in force in regard to the authority of persons in the civil, military and naval service of the United States at the place where any general or special election is held in any State.' This statute was adopted February 25, 1865, after a protracted debate in the Senate, and almost without opposition in the House of Representatives, by the concurrent votes of both of the leading political parties of the country, and became a law by the approval of President Lincoln. It was re-enacted in 1874 in the Revised Statutes of the United States, sections 2002 and 5528, which are as follows: SECTION 5529. Every officer or other person in the military or naval service who, by force, threat, intimidation, order, advice, or otherwise, prevents or attempts to prevent any qualified voter of any State from freely exercising the right of suffrage at any general or special election in such State, shall be fined not more than $5,000 and be imprisoned at hard labor not more than five years. "SECTION 5530. Every officer of the army or navy who prescribes or fixes, or attemps to prescribe or fix, whether by proclamation, order, or otherwise, the qualifications of voters at any election in any State, shall be punished as provided in the preceding seetion. "SECTION 5531. Every officer or other person in the military or naval service who, by force, threat, intimidation, order, or otherwise, compels or attempts to compel any officer holding an election in any State to receive a vote from a person not legally qualified to vote, or who imposes or attempts to impose any regulations for conducting any general or special election in a State, different from those prescribed by law, or interferes in any manner with any officer of an election in the discharge of his duty, shall be punished as provided in section fifty-five hundred and twenty nine. "SECTION 5532. Every person convicted of any of the offenses specified in the five preceding sections shall, in addition to the punishments therein severally pre scribed, be disqualified from holding any office of honor, profit, or trust under the United States; but nothing in those sections shall be construed to prevent any officer, soldier, sailor, or marine from exercising the right of suffrage in any clection district to which he may belong, if otherwise qualified according to the laws of the State in which he offers to vote. "The foregoing enactments would seem to be sufficient to prevent military interference with the elec |