May 13, 1912 (3)

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. · l\fr. Speaker, I desire to have read from the Clerk's desk a letter written April ~7, 1912, by Johll' 1\I. Stahl, of Chicago, legislative agent of the Farmers' National Congress, on this subject.

The Clerk read as follows:

FAR.mms' NATIO::-l'AL Co~GREss,

U:N'ITED STATES OF AMERICA, .

Chicago, April 't.1, 1912.

Hon. WILLI A M w. RUCKER, The House, Washington, D. C.

DEAR Sm: The Farmers' National Congress, which for 20 years has advocated the direct election of United States Senators, is indeed gratified to ob s erve that the joint resolution bearing on this reform is about to receive the sanction of both Houses, and largely because of the conciliatory attitude of the House. This confirms the opinion we have always entertained and expressed that the Congress of the United States is a remarkably high-mini.led, honorable, and patriotic body, earnestly d e siring to do that which will be for the public welfare and ready to surrender small differences of opinion to gain real progress and r e form.

We most earnestly hope that when the joint resolution above referred to comes to a vote in the House next week that it will receive a large favorable vote, making such a large majority in its favor as will carry much weight to State legislatures. ·

The farmers of the United States are watching with much interest the course of the two Houses of Congress on this and other measures, and will note with intere s t the votes of individual Members of Congress. I most earne s tly ask you to use a moment of the precious time of the House to communicate to it the very earnest wish of the farmers of the United States, , as expressed through the Farmers' National Congress, for the pas s age of the joint resolution for the direct election of S e nator s , coupled with our very high · opinion of the Congress of the United Stat e s and belief in its sincerity, ability, and patriotism.

I have the honor to b e ,

Very respectfully, yours,

- JOHN M. STAHL,

Leoislatii:e Agent, Farmers' National Congress.

.Mr. AUSTIN. Mr. Speaker, before the gentleman from Missouri yields the floor I would like to ask him if he has a letter from the Woman's National Suffrage Association, or Mrs. Bennett, of Kentucky, which he could read to the House?

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I have received a letter from the gentleman's constituent, which I will transmit to him.

l\fr. AUSTIN . She is not a constituent of mine.

l\:Ir. BARTLETT. l\Ir . Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it.

Mr. BARTLETT. I desire to know who has the conclusion of this debate ns it now stands, the gentleman from Missouri or myself? The first motion comes from him, but my motion is a preferential motion, and being the first to be voted on should I not nave the close of the debate?

The SPEAKER. The Chair would think that the gentleman from Missouri has the right to conclude the debate.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. 1 .rhat has been the universal

Mr. BARTLETT. I do not think it has been the universal

The SPEAKER. The motion of the gentleman from Missouri brings the two Houses together.

l\Ir. BARTLETT. So does mine, Mr. Speaker. If some gentleman were to arise and make the motion to amend the amendment of the gentleman from Georgia, why, then, according to his own theory, the closing of debate would shift to that l\Iember.

Mr. BARTLETT. Not at nll, l\Ir. Speaker.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. The parliamentary practice is that I would have the closing of debate.

Mr. BARTLETT. The gentleman has not investigate(!. the

The SPEAKER. The practice is, a Member occupying the position of the gentleman from Missouri, with reference to this bill, would have the closing.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. .And the gentleman from Georgia knows the precedents-- [Cries of "Regular order!"]

The SPEAKER. The Chair is willing to hear: the gentleman on the question of order.

Mr. BARTLETT. I merely wanted to have the question of procedure settled. ·

The SPEAKER. The Chair thinks that the closing of debate rests with the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. BARTLETT. All right.

_ The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia for one hour.

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr . Speaker, it is unfortunate that a question of so much importance to all the people of the United States, involving a question of a radical change in the form of our Government, should be permitted to be considered but for an hour on each side. It is unfortunate that a proposition so vital to the welfare, the continued progress of prosperity of the section from which I come-to the 13 States of this Union known as the Southern States-in which they are vitally interested, should be permitted to be discussed so briefly. It is still more unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that a proposition which has time and time again received the condemnation of this Democratic House, certainly upon two roll calls, should now be approved by this House and the Democratic position thereon reversed, and that only an hour should be given to those who would uphold the right and dignity of this House; it is true that the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Rucker] can take an hour to show the reasons why he has receded from his former position, but he may occupy the entire hour himself, he may occupy the entire day if he chooses, he may speak \llltil the hours become days and the days become weeks and the weeks become years and the years become cycles and ages, but the gentleman from Missouri will never be able to satisfy th.e country and this House why this radical change on the position which he presents to the House is justified. Mr. Speaker, I recall some of the history of this resolution. Last year, on April 13, the gentlem . an from Michigan [Mr. YOUNG] offered, as an amendment to the Rucker resolution, this same identical amendment, which reappears as the Bristow Senate amendment. It was advocated then by Members upon that side, and especially and strongly by the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. JAcKson]. In the debate the gentleman from Missouri [l\fr. RUCKER] himself resisted its adoption in earnest and eloquent language, and called upon this side of the House to vote down this proposition, and upon a roll call a majority of 66 Democrats was then recorded against the identical proposition. On the 21st of April, 1911, when a motion was made by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. OLMSTED] that the House concur in the amendment, and the gentleman from Missouri again was heard in debate against it, the House, by a majority of 60-111 yeas and 171 nays-refused to concur in this Senate amendment. 1 Through the long summer months, the fall months, and tlle winter months, and now into the coming of summer again, this proposition lay in the conference committee, with a determination on the part of the conferees to stand by the will of the House and not to accede to the demands of the Senate.

And now, Mr. Speaker, we have the remarkable proposition, without · any report from the conference committee, that the House turn its back upon what it did upon former occasions upon this very identical bill and vote to take up the Senate amendment and adopt it by concurring in it. Mr. Speaker, this amendment has somewhat of a history. In the last Congress it was what is known as the Sutherland amendment, and it was voted down in the Senate, and the very Senator who is the author of this amendment in the Senate this Congress, I a Senator from Kansas, voted against this proposition, then \ known as the " Sutherland amendment." When he returned · home to Kansas meetings were held and certain organizations : of colored voters demanded that Congress . pass this amendment, and the Senator from Kansas offered it again and became its chief champion.

So this might well be dubbed "the Kansas Negro amendment to the Constitution." But time passed, and still no sign of agreement by our conferees, until there came to this city a few days ago a distinguished Democrat, who is the titular head of the party, or at least until we can have another convention; and after a conference with certain leaders of this House it was ' announced in the newspaper which I hold in my hand-the ' Washington Post-that Mr. Bryan had come, and after he had conferred with certain gentlemen-the Speaker of this House, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, the chairman of the Committee on Election of President and Vice President-orders had been given to have the House act upon this amendment and recede from its disagreement with the Senate and to accept the same. That is published in the Washington Post.

Mr." RUCKER of Missouri May I ask the gentleman from Georgia a question?

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Do I understand that the paper said that orders had been given r l\fr. BARTLETT. I do not say the paper said orders had been given, but that is the effect of it, and from what is now occurring it looks very much like orders were given and they are being followed.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. That is the gentleman's conclusion about it.

Mr. BARTLETT. Of course, that is my conclusion and that is the conclusion that everyone would draw from this article and the change of front of the gentleman. What other reason can the gentleman from Missouri give for his turnabout face upon this proposition? The gentleman from Missouri marches out of this House backed by a majority of 66, and 60 of his Democratic colleagues of this House, enthused with the belief that he was right, and enthused, I apprehend, with a determination to stand by the will of the House. We supposed that like a knight errant, panoplied with tlle right that this House should have its will when 66 majority demanded it he would insist on it and . we followed him, and we followed him in the contest believing that he would stand firm against the senatorial position and not yield. And lo and behold, instead of. being a knight errant, bold and gallant, we find him a mere Don Quixote, returning with his favorite bill upon a stretcher after be bad charged the windmills of the Senate. [Laughter and applause.] So the gentleman from Missouri comes back disfigured, maimed, his lance broken, followed by his faithful attendant, the gentleman from New York, whom I will not call his Sancho Panza, because, while he was the only attendant of the gentleman from• Missouri in this wonderful crazy charge upon the Senate windmills, still the gentleman from New York did endeavor valiantly to uphold the dignity and right of the House.

So, Mr. Speaker, we are asked to-day to reverse our position. of voters? . The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RucKER], after pledges to the House by his vote, comes back and asks , that this amendment, originating in Kansas, demanded chiefly and first by the negro voters of Kansas at the hands of Senator BRISTOW, who before had voted against it, shall be agreed to; that this House shall forget its dignity, subvert its will, and pass a law which means the death of this amendment, for, if adopted, it will tend to bring about ruin and chaos again in the sections which some of us represent, and will never receive the approval of those States.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how else to account for the sudden change of opinion of the gentleman . from Missouri [Mr. RucKER]. I do not know how to account for it unless there be some overweening and dominant power that demands this legislation at our hands. I revere great statesmen; I love my party; I have never scratched a ticket from President to coroner.

I come from a section of country, Mr. Speaker, that during all the political defeats and adversities of the party has never wavered in its devotion to Democracy. We have kept alive, like the vestal virgins of old, the faith and the fire burning upon the altar of our party when others, including Missouri, followed strange gods and hungered after the fleshpots of Egypt. [Applause.] We have not asked for offices, nor have · we asked a share in the administra tlon of the Government. I have stood in this House when only 100 Democrats from all this vast domain of ours could answer the roll call on this side; when there were only 10 Democrats from all the States other than the Southern States. But through such times we have kept the flag flying, we have kept the faith, we have kept the sacred fire alight upon the altar, asking nothing, demanding nothing. You can have your offices, you can have your patronage, but keep away · from us the prospects and the probability of reenactment of the former infamous Federal election laws. [Applause.]

Mr. Speaker, I will not recount, because time is too short and the occasion does not demand it, the tribulation, the sorrows, the suffering, the horror, and the infamy of those years-1867 to 1894-when the Federal election law was on the statute books. up to the hour when they were repealed by a Democratic Congress. The act of 1894 repealing these Federal election laws was signed by that illustrious Democratic President-the only one we have elected since the war-and he will go down in history as a great President along with Washington, Jefferson, and Madison, though perhaps not so great, but able, honest, faithful, and true-Grover Cleveland, of New York. [Applause.) Some may differ from me as to his greatness, some may malign him, but he will live in history as a great President, who tried to do right as he saw it, when those who have maligned and defamed filtn are justly forgotten. Now, Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this Senate amendment is plain. The Senator from New York [Mr. RooT], while this amendment was being discussed, said:

My proposition is, that if the Members of the Senate are to be elected at popular elections, the Government of the United States must retain the power to make those elections honest and fair and free ; the power to say, if the regulations prescribed by the State are not adequate to that end, that they shall be superseded by regulations made by the Congress of the United States. My proposition further is that without that power accompanying this change in the method of the election of Senators, if the change be made, the Government of the United States has surrendered the power for its own preservation and protection.

As evidence of the purpose of the advocates of this amendment I quote from the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of date February 10, 1911, as follows : ·

Mr. BA-CO)I . Mr. President, do I understand the Senator from New York to mean that if the States have now upon their statute books laws which regulate the suffrage 17 e in those States, such as the Senator speaks of as "the grandfather clause," though that ls simply a term generic in its character which relates to a general class ot legislation-does the Senator mean that, with the laws now upon the statute books of the several Southern States, if the proposed amendment of the Senator from Utah [Mr. SUTHERLAND] should be adopted and we should pass the joint resolution to amend the Constitution and it should be ratified by three-fourths of the States, it would then be within the power of Congress. if it conceived that these grandfather clauses, as they are called, all the body of laws with reference to the regulations and limitations of the suffrage in the Southern States-if Congress should conceive that they were unconstitutional, does the Senator mean that, in his opinion, Congress would have the power, under the amendment of the Senator from Utah, to annul those provisions and •to make Federal laws to control the election of Senators in such way as to insure the right to vote to all persons thought by Congress to be entitled to vote? Mr. RooT. Without the slightest doubt.

Mr. BACON. Well, Mr. President, it is well that we are given this notice of what the Senator does mean and what the Sutherland amendment means.

Mr. RooT. I meant to put you on notice, and I mean to put the whole country on notice it my words are able to do so .

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Does the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BARTLET'.J.'] concede that the Federal Government has power to fix the qualification of voters?

Mr. BARTLETT. Concede its power to fix the qualification

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Of voters.

Mr. :BARTLETT . In the case of Congressmen; yes.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. That the Federal Government has the power to fix the qualifications of voters?

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes; I do.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I just wanted to get the gentleman's statement of it.

Mr. BARTLETT. If the gentleman will read the case of Siebold v. the United States he will find the courts so held.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I merely want to say that the gentleman knows a good JllaD.Y authorities, where the Supreme Court has held affirmatively time and again that the General Government has no such power.

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Georgia has tried to become familiar with the authorities upon this question, and I could give the names of the cases and the volumes in which they are to be found if I had the time. The gentleman has confounded that proposition with the idea that the Congress of the United States has not the power under the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments to prescribe the qualifications, and the States having prescribed them, and not having violated the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments, in not making the distinction on account of race, color, or previous condition, the Supreme Court, God bless it, has sustained our franchise laws.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. l\Ir. Speaker, I understand-- .

The SPEAKER . . Does the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BARTLETT] yield to the · gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RUCKER]?

Mr. BARTLETT. I have to yield. · l\Ir. RUCKER of Missouri. No; you do not.

Mr. BARTLETT. I will yield. .

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. I beg the gentleman's pardon. As I understand the decision upon this, after the State has enacted a law fixing the qualification of voters then the Federal Government has power to see that every State exercises the law prescribed by the State.

l\1r. BARTLETT. I put the opinion of Senator RooT against the gentleman. Then the Senator gives us notice as to what it does mean, and that the Bristow amendment means that Congress, under this amendment, will have power to fix the qualifications of electors, and to the question that the Senator asked him on the floor of the Senate he said, "Without the slightest doubt."

He said:

I mean to put you on notice now, and imt the whole country on • notice, if my words can do so.

I do not know what the law may be, but I know what the great lawyer in the Senate who advocated it said it meant, and he put the country on notice that he intended it to mean that. That may be an answer to the gentleman; . I do not know.

Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman permit a question?

The SPE.A.KER. Does the gentleman from Georgia yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin?

l\lr. BARTLETT. Yes.

Mr. COOPER. Is not this clause in the amendment: The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors in the most numerous branch of . the legislature"?

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes; it has been there ever since the Constitution was enacted.

l\Ir. COOPER Does the gentleman claim that under that provision the Congress of the United States would have the right to go into the States and prescribe the qualifications of the voters?

l\1r. BARTLETT . I think that fixes the qualifications of electors when they shall be qualified to vote for the most numerous _ branch of the legislature. _

Mr. COOPER. I always understood, and was taught so when I first began the study of law, that suffrage was not a Federal right at all, b.ut that it was a privilege conferred by a State, and the only condition prescribed by a State was that when the State fixes the qualifications there should be no discrimination on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Mr. BARTLETT. I will read what Mr. BRISTOW, the author of this amendment, said on the subject:

I do not believe it takes .away from the Federal Government the power to appoint a marshal or organize an army, as the Senator from Georgia [1\Ir . BACON] indicates with such emphasis. If the Federal Government can organize an army now to protect any State or the elections in any State, it can do so if this amendment is adopted.

l\Ir . COOPER. Will the gentleman permit an interruption right there?

Mr. BARTLETT. Yes.

.!\fr. COOPER. Under the Constitution as it is to-day, and as the gentleman will leave it, has not the Congress the right to go into a State so far as the election of Representatives in Congress is concerned? If the gentleman wants to cbnjure up a. scarecrow--

Mr. BARTLETT. Oh, if the gentleman wants to ask me a question, I will be glad to answer it; but the gentleman ought not to undertake to argue the question in my time.

Mr. COOPER. We have not changed the authority of Congress?

Mr. BARTLETT. No; and you will not succeed in enacting this amendment, because the · States will not vote for it.

Mr. COOPER. So far as the action of Congress is concerned, does the gentleman apprehend any danger from Members of Congress?

l\1r. BARTLETT. I do not for the present.

Mr. COOPER. Then why do you apprehend any danger for your Senators? The same people will vote at the same election. l\11'. BARTLETT. Well, I wish I bad more- time to give the gentleman an opportunity to make a speech against my amendment. I do not think he hurts it any. On the contrary, I think he helps it.

Mr. Speaker, I was a Member of this House for 16 years, when the Republicans had the majority; I have seen Republicans discountenance and vote down and frown down any effort to reenact a Federal election law or to deprive us of representation because of our election laws in tll.e Southern States, passed to protect us from the ignorant and vicious voter. Twenty-two years ago, when that great Speaker and statesman, Thomas B. Reed, was at the helm in this House, nobody was · permitted to do it, although certain distinguished Republicans, on account of overzeal or through reasons of expediency, offered : the amendment. Then followed that noble and genial gentleman , 1 David B. Henderson, from Iowa, who was a one-legged Federal · soldier who had fought for the cause of the Union and left a ' part of his manly body upon the battle field . . He also frowned upon it . Then came that great old Roman, honest, earnest, sin .. . cere, Uncle JoE CANNON, as Speaker. [Applause.] I . do not be- 1 lieve with him politically, an.d do not agree with many things ' that he did; I have censured him from the political standpoint; but he stood like the rock of Gibraltar, even in a Republican · caucus, where his own political life might be at stake, and frowned down and fought down and voted down any effort to rejuvenate and renew the infamous Federal election laws or to injure the South. [Applause.]

And while others may censure, while others may criticize and malign and abuse him; justly or unjustly, - he has a place in the hearts of the people of the South that will not be erased because of his generous treatment of the southern people. . [Ap - , plause.] He may have made political success possible for some of us; nevertheless he did, although stalwart Republican, as he was, as much as anybody to allay the bitterness of the past between the sections, and I take this occasion · to give him the thanks of my people. [Applause.]

Mr. Speaker, on Thursday last there gathered within my , home town the remnant of the Confederate veterans, tlle last frngment of that heroic and glorious army that marched beneath the fiery _ :flag of the Southern Confederacy and immortalized southern bravery and valor on every battle field of the Civil War. [Appl ause.] In thinned ranks and with wasted and tottering forms they joined together with their comrades in celebrating the glo'fies of the past and the valor of their comrades. Before they adjourned, with only one dissenting voice in a meeting of 16,000 soldiers, they passed a resolution in response to the invitation of Gen. Tribble, the commander in chief . of the Grand Army of the Republic, agreeing that next year they would meet him and the survivors of the Union Army on the battle field of Gettysburg [applause] to celebrate the anniversary of that great battle by recalling its memories with one another on the field where 5-0 years ago they stood in battle array, with bayonets pointed at each other's throats. con ­ fronting death, and making immortal not simply Union soldiers' and Confederate soldiers' valor, but making immortal the heroism of the .American soldier. [Applause.] Is it not time, in God's name, that legislation should stop or, rather, not ' be renewed, that would reopen the scru·s that have healed! And shall it be the work of a Democratic House to again reopen and renew the bitterness of the past?

Even to the gentlemen who fathered these propositions that a Republican Congress voted down I now bear no animosity nor do my people bear any animosity. We honor you, because you have recognized the peculiar situation in my country and have said to us, " God bless you ih your efforts to solve a problem the like of which no people in the tide of time ever faced."

And now, when Republicans for 16 years have refrained from doing it, . the Democratic majority, at the demand of somebody, proposes to do what a Republican House never permitted to find its way on the calendar. When I say to my people at home that my Democratic friends in the North, the East, and the West in a Democratic House have done that which no Republican House ever succeeded in doing when it had a majority ranging at times from 13 to 150, I will tell you what they will say to me. We have followed the Democratic flag. We followed Bryan in three unsuccessful campaigns. Some of us here have taken our political lives in our hands in order to support him. There are friends and neighbors of mine who did not agree with him, and it has taken 15 years to all their opposition, simply because I was a supporter of the present titular leader of my party. But neither Mr. Bryan, nor the Speaker of this House, nor the gentleman from Texas [Mr. HENRY], chairman of the Committee on Rules, nor the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RucKER] can drive me or compel me to vote for a proposition which my nature condemns and which my people universally denounce. [Applause.] When a Democratic House shall put this infamy upon my people-I measure my words and mean what I say, with all due respect for those who vote for it and Without meaning any offense-when a Democratic House shall put this infamy upon my people, I will give you notice now, in order that you may well reflect upon it, that you test to the breaking point our party loyalty in the coming election. We are for tariff reform. We are for the exercise of the powers of government to control and regulate interstate commerce and to regulate the trusts. We are for an economical expenditure of the Government funds; but, above all these, is our determination to preserve white supremacy . I bear it whispered by some that this is poor Democracy, but those who favor this proposition will not receive the indorsement and support of my people. I am as true a Democrat as ever lived. I have never scratched a ticket, as I have stated, from President to coroner, and I never shall.

But abo-ve the question of the tariff and the economical administration of the Government and the control of trusts and the regulation of interstate commerce arises this vital question for my people. And . if a Republican majority would not put it _ on us for 16 years, shall it be said that the first Democratic majority in 16 years shall do that which no Republican Congress since 1890 ever dared to do? If so, then my people, while they are better Democrats than the people who support these propositions, will not give their approval or their sanction to that set of men who indorse such a doctrine. Call that treason if you please. But if that be treason to the Democratic Party, make the most of it. [Applause.]

How much time have I consumed, Mr. Speaker?

Tlle SPEAKER. The gentleman from Georgia has consumed ment. 35 minutes.

l\fr. BARTLETT. 1\Ir. Speaker, I feel deeply in this matter, and I fear I have taxed my own strength and the patience of the House too far. I would not ordinarily speak as I do, but I feel deeply upon this proposition. I would not utter what I have said, nor would I endeavor to call attention to the difference in the party concerning this proposition, but the party might as well understand it. We have never faltered in our faith to the candidate or to the ticket. When others deserted, when others failed, with the ring of the true metal we - answered every call.

This is vital. This bill gives Congress authority to erect in our midst an election board, a returning board, election judges, and · supervisors. My amendment prevents Congress from doing these things. · As a boy, and even after I grew to manhood, I have seen elections conducted beneath the bayonets of United States troops, by United States marshals, by Federal supervisors, and returning boards. I experienced the nightmare and the horror of it. We have got away from that, thanks in great measure to the patience, to the good will, to the desire of · the Republican Party to let us alone. To those who in this great struggle have given us their sympathy we extend our thanks.

- We are grateful to those of you who in that great trial gave us your help and forbearance. To those of you ,over on that side 01· on this side-Republicans, Populists, or Democrats-who in this hour propose to enact such a law and criticize us for resisting it, I say to you that we shall go on pursuing the course we feel to be right, and those who censure and criticize us will be consigned to the calm indifference of our contempt. [Applause.] · - Mr. Speaker, the wisest man the world is said ever to have known, the man who wrote the Proverbs, said once:

There be three things which are ' too wonderful for me; yea, four Which I know not:

The way of an eagle in .the air, the way of a serpent upon a rock, the way of a ship in the midst of the sea, and the way of a man with a maid. Unfortunately for Solomon he did not live in this day. The other thing that would 'have been too strange and wonderful for him would be the ways of the gentleman from Missouri [1\Ir. RucKER] in · his performance as conferee between the two Houses. Solomon was not wise enough to understand it, and therefore I will not undertake it.

Mr. Speaker, I have presented, hurriedly and disconnectedly, my objections to this amendment.

l\Ir. PROUTY. Will the gentleman yield for a question?

Mr. BARTLETT. Always.

Mr. PROUTY. The gentleman several times during this discussion has referred to 13 States. What States did the gentleman refer to?

Mr. BARTLETT. Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia-I will speak for Georgia by authority-Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and Oklahoma. These States that went through the hell and fire of reconstruction.

Mr. PROUTY. The gentleman means the Confederate States, the States that formed the southern confederacy?

1\fr. BARTLETT. Yes.

Mr. PROUTY. And the gentleman is opposed to the amendment because it gives to the Federal Government power to supervise elections?

1\Ir. BARTLETT. Yes.

1\Ir. PROUTY. Did the gentleman know that the constitution of the southern confederacy provided for exactly the same thing that we are seeking to put in?

l\Ir. BARTLETT. I do not care if · it did; I would not vote for it now.

l\Ir. PROUTY. Article 1, section 5, paragraph 1:

The times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof, subject to the provisions of this constitution, but the Congress may at any time make or alter such regulations, except as to the time and place of choosing Senators. ·

Mr. BARTLETT. That is the same as it is in the Constitution of the United States and has · been since 1789.

1\Ir. PROUTY. And the gentleman is trying to take it out. l\Ir. BARTLETT. No; I am not trying to take it out. I want it to stay in . . It is the provision that you were trying to amend. Now, l\fr. Speaker, my amendment proposes simply to provide that Congress shall not have any power hereafter to supervise the voters in a State, to establish election boards, appoint superv:isors of election or returning boards, or to use the Army or the United States marshals at the polls. If that is adopted, then this amendment can be adopted. I appeal to every man on this side of the House, every Democrat, to vote for that amendment. Speaker, I know not what may be the result of this amendment. I know that the "Democratic Party ought to grant to that great Democratic region from which I come and from which the majority :Members on this side come, the poor pri\­ ilege of adopting this amendment of mine before it passes this new law amending the Constitution. I know as far as the ultimate results are concerned that it will never become a law by amendment of the Constitution of the United States if it is not agreed to, for the adoption of the Bristow amendment tings the death knell for this original resolution.

Be that as it may, Mr. Speaker, we of the South shall go on in the future as we have in the past. In spite of reconstruction and its infamous results, in spite of the Federal election laws, in spite of all that we have arisen from our desolation and our destruction until we stand united, unrivaled in our commercial and agricultural powers and everything that makes up great and powerful States. The vine has yielded its fruit, the earth its increase, and the sun in the heavens the sunshine, the dew and the rain, and in spite of Republican law we have prospered. We are prosperous because we have been enabled by our own efforts to solve in our own way and in God's own appointed time the problems that confronted us. If this opportunity shall be taken now to retard that great prosperity by a Democratic House, well and good, l\fr. Speaker, we shall go on in the future as in the past, devoted to our principles of local selfgovernment and the supremacy of the Anglo-Saxon race. We will make our way forward still, and we will stand by our convictions and duties regardless of party, regardless of objections, regardless of all things till-

Wrapt in flames the realms of ether . glow

And heaven's last thunder shakes the world below.

[Applause.]

l\fr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman reserves the balance of his time, which is 15 mintnes.

Mr. RUCKER of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [l\fr. Henry].

The SPEAKER. · The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Henry] is recognized.

1\Ir. Hllli~RY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of regret that I can not relieve the anxiety of the gentleman from Georgia by agreeing with him in his position. I come from the ' same part of this country from which he hails, the South, and have no dread of the occurrences predicted by him in his remarks. I am against the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BilTLErT] to the motion made by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. RUCKER], because I know that if this amendment goes back to tlie Senate of the United States by reason of the Bartlett encumbrance the election .of Senators by direct vote of the people will be postponed for many years, and the proposition will die there. [Applause.]

I am in favor of the election of United States Senators by a direct vote of the people of the respective States of this Union. Mr. Speaker, much has been said on this question, and yet it seems to me that it is necessary to say but little in order to arrive at a correct solution of the problems before us. The gentleman's argument has covered a wide range of topics not at all relevant to the subject. In the first place, he has stated that Mr. Bryan had come to the city of Washington and whispered in the ears of the Speaker and the gentleman from Missouri and my ear that the Bristow amendment should be adopted. Mr. Speaker, long before I talked with 1\Ir. Bryan about this matter, and long before knowing bis position, I wired the gentleman from Missouri while I was in Worcester, Mass., favoring the motion he is making to-day and wished to be paired in favor of it.

1912. CONGRESSIONAL :1 ..... ~~~~~~--~~~~~~~_.:_~~~~~~~y-~~~~~~~ . Mr. BARTLE'l'T. May I ask the gentleman a question? r Mr. HEl-<"RY of Texas. I ha-ve not the time to yield and regret it. Let me say for the gentleman's benefit to-day that if · he would allow himself to follow Mr. Bryan a little oftener he would be more frequently right. [Applause.] I Mr. BARTLETT. And be · certain to get beat, too, · every time. [Laughter and applause.] ; Mr. HENRY of Texas. Yes; as long as Democrats stab the Democratic nominee there is danger of defeat. [A.Pplause.] 1 l\Ir . . BARTLETT. That is the truth, whether it is acceptable or not. '

M:r. HE:NRY of Texas. Now, l\Ir. Speaker, let us argue this question as lawyers should . and see what it means. We find in th~ Constitution a.s our fathers wrote it originally, Article I, section 3 :

The Senate of the United States shall oe composed of two Senators from each S t ate, chosen by the legislature t'here.of, for :Six years.

That was the original clause. Then we turn · over to section 4 and call to it the attention .of this House and :the country to-day in order that we may .understand the question upon which we are to vote, and not allow it to be confused by a lot .of sophistries, as the gentleman from Georgia. is endeavoring to ao.

l\!r. BARTLETT. Better ha-ve sophistries than nothing at all. Laughter.

Mr. HENRY of ' Texas. This section reads:

The times AJld places and manner of holding elections for . senators and Representative~ shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature 'thereof, btrt the Congress may at an;y time 1Jy law make or alter sue.1~ -regulation except as to the places of · choosing Se-nators.

Why, gentlemen, hearing the supposed -argument of the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. B.A.1lTLETT1, no one could discover that he had ever · read that clause -of the Constitution. [Applause.] He conjUTe~ up '' “force bills" -and say-s they will be .Put upon the South again. There is no man · anywhere who has higher regard for the sovereignty 'and rights rof ~b.e States than I have, but "force bills" have no terror for me m this ~Y and. generation, for they are not a-~ eommg. My. God, :wIB. sectionalism never cease and will not. m~ on both sides ~f ~s House .1337' .it aside when we are considering a gr . great constitutional · qu.es.tion! [Applause.] Let me say ta the gentleman from · Georgia that there was never a time during the 125 years' existence -of this Government when Congress · Could not reach _ out -and lay its hands upon ievery State :0f it~s Union in regard to . the elections f of Senators and Representatives 1 both, , except n 'to the places 1 0f < choosing the Senators. Now, what does that mean? rt snn- · ply implies that -our fathers saw proper, when they faShioned . this Government. to surrender to the Federal Government · the power to regulate ielections of Representatives a~d · Senators. Our :fathers saw proper, when they fashioned this Government, to surrender to ~e . Fedm:a1 GCITerm;nent .the power to take con· trol of the elections , of Representatives 1! filley so desired, .a.nd ;while they have taken Charge of the election '°f Representatives, .the same men who :voted .for Representati'ves m Congress were voting for the members of the legislature who were to choose the Senators. It is all one election, '8.D.d ' en1-y man wJio in.telligently .reads the Constitution and · statutes understands it. What is the proposed amendment which the " gentleman 'Bays 11s so dangerous .to. th~ country. Let us anaylze .i.t, .which as. law- ,yers and patriotic citizens we should do. Here it 1.s, the Bristow : amendment, that the gentleman from Georgia -endeav-ors to .make appear , r so dangerous before the American people:

The Senate of 'the United States shall 'be composed of two . senators from each State, , elected f by the people thereof, .for six years, and ea.c:h , senator .shall ihave one :vote . . Di.e .electors . in each State shall have the ~l 1 \~c~f~~~s 1 ~~=ee 8 :or the . electors of the .most numerous branch Instead of this Federal Government undertaking to fix the qualifications of electors, this amendment leaves .in ±he ConStitution the power providing that the States shall fi{/) 't1u:; qua.lification of the electors that choose the Senators and Representatives for the State legislatures. [Appl.a.use.] It p.r.eserv-es that right to the ,people of the various States, and does not take it away from them. Let gentlemen meet the · question 11.S it is written in the very face .of the amendment and .not try to .confuse it with · sophistry. What more? · ? It proceeds to provide— t That the legislature .of .any :State ma,y - empower .the executive tb.exeot to make • temporary appointments until 'the people fiU rtlw vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

That is th~ Bristow .amendment, and ls an there is to it The gentleman from Georgia is trying t-0 strike out .of tlle Con· stitution something that was :placed there when th:is 'Government was formed. [Applause.]

I am trying to keep in i:ll.e Constitution what our fathers wrote there in order that we may this day ' institute one cl the RECORD - Rous& 63511~ : great-est . reforms in the history of the · Government by providing for the election · of United States Senators. [Applause.] Ali, ' l\fr. Speaker, if we will but concur in this amendment we will J 1 have no force bills in the future. There will be broth€rly love ~ between the people of every part of this great country; there . 1 will be no endeavor on the part of Senators and Representatives , to stifle the voice in the different States; but the time will J come, and that speedily, when the voters will choose their own Senators by direct election. Expulsion and charges of eorrup- ; tion may cease . at the other end -0f the Capitol [applause], and, , that body will be the people's forum .as well as this House, and . destroy the power th at now .controls legislatures and fills some ; seats with those who are friendly to special privilege and predatory wealth .and those seeking favors from the Govern- : ment. Therefore I am glad of the opportunity to vote f.or this motion made by the gentleman from Missouri, and thus vote · down the amendment designed to bury it in the Senate of the United States, where it can never again come to life. ' f.Applause.1 l aID glad to say on this occasion that if we concur in the .Bristow amendment we d-0 no -violence to those . 1 things our fathers placed in the Constitution, but preserve and perpetuate their ideas -0f government, the genius of this 1 1 Republic, .and make it possible for the people to control every . branch of their Governments, both Federal and State. There- 1 fore I proudly east my vote in favor of the motion off-ered by the 1 , . gentleman from Missouri flli. RucKER.] [Loud applause.] ; .Afr . .BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker, right at this point, since the , gentleman from Texas [Ml'. HENRY] .has awakened so suddenly ~ to .a knowledge of the Constitution, I desire to call the attention of the House to the votes 'Of the gentleman from 'Texas upon ~ this constitutional question on two separate occasions. On the 13th day of April, 1911, the gentleman from Michigan IMr .. '. YouNG] .offered this 'identical proposition as ~ amendment t-0 the Rucker bill amending the Constitution. After argument, in 1 , wllieh 1 believe but I am not positive, the gentleman from 7rexn.s' participated, a roll call was had on that · day, and upon this roll call the gentleman from Texas, the. constitutional lawyer . fro-m . Texas, so well informed of what it means now, 1 voted "no," to be found on page 241 of the RECORD. Again, on . June 21, 1911, this identical Bristow amendment was up before the House and a motion was made by the gentleman from 1 Pennsyl '\"'ania I Mr. OLMSTED], one . of the conferees U.Pon this bill, 1 :t-0 concur in that amendment . and to concur in this amendment now pending which is to be voted upon, and the gentleman from Texas, who now parades himself as so w€11 informed upon · the question and th~ want . of danger in the amendm-ent, voted “no,” and that is to be found -0n page . 2433 of the REcoRD -0f this -Congress. Men change, times change, but t1:le gentleman : from Texas keeps pace even with the gentleman from Missouri ; in his kaleidoscopic changes on this question. I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi [~Ir. Sisson] .five minutes. I M:r. SISSON. Mr. Speaker, before I begin t-0 address myself 1 to this question, since this .matter is -0f so much importance, I j will at this time submit a :request tha't the time .be extended ! 1. hour 60 .minutes to be controlled by the gentlem.an from 1 Missouri and :30 minutes by the gentleman from Georgia. .I This ts . a -very important question. and I ask to submit that re- ~ quest. I have .consulted the gentleman from Missouri, and Jie :States that he would not object .

Jr.fr. RUOKER of Missouri. I will not obJect

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. .A!.ExANDER). 'T~ gentle- , man from Mississippi asks unanimous consent that this debate be extended for one hour, the time to be controlled one-half by J the gentleman from Georgia and one-half by the gentleman from . .Missouri. 'Is there objection?

Afr. HENRY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I object. \

Mr. SISSON. I hope fue gentleman will not object. You ' had 15 minutes, .and many gentlemen here want to -speak. I

The . SPEAKER pro rtempore. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Henry] objects. The gentleman from Mississippi IMr. 1 SISSON] has five minutes. 1 ; l\1r. SISSON. .ask the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Henry] to withhold llis .objection. This is ~ v.ery important matt-er to the country. · [Cries of Regular order!"] ( Yr.. HENRY -0f Texas. Mr . . Speaker, . ker, I withdraw the objec- / · tion, inasmuch " h .us gen tl e m e n seem s to be anxious . to . speak. .

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request made by the gentleman from Mississippi? [After a pause.] Th:e Chair hears none.

Mr. MANN. I understand that shall n o t aff ec t the ord-er as to the previous question? \

Mr. SIS.SON. Not at all. . , ·

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Speaker -i y1 e1U. 1 0 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi Illi. S1sso N] .

- l\Ir. SISSON. l\fr. Speaker, I am going to be just as frank with . the membership of this House as it is possible for a man to be. I realize fully that this amendment places the elections of the Senators in exactly the same condition, if the amendment is voted for by the States, that the Constitution now places the election of Members of the House , of Representatives. But there is a vital reason why the fathers of this Republic made ~. a distinction. Under the present Constitution it is not possible l for the Federal Government to control the election to both branches of Congress, because under the present Constitution the only thing that the United States Senate can do in refer- . ence to the election to the Senate would be to determine whether ! or not the State legislature had acted honestly and fairly in l the election of the Senator. But if this amendment shall go 1 through, then you tear away the legislature of the State and .you permit the supervision- of elections in the State for Sen­ / a tors just as you may now supervise the election in reference to a Congressman . . ~ Now, in this piping time of peace, when all are dwelling to­ 't geth . er in unity and fraternal love, we do not need . necessarily constitutional protection. And the time may come in the future, in our large territory, which is rapidly being built up, that the cry of Federal encroachment may not come from the South, but from the small New England States, because they ' are entitled, under the Constitution, to . equal representation in the Senate irrespective of the number of people which they · have. The large States may become restive over that large representation. The fathers _ of the Republic so drew this Con­ '. stitution that the people could protect the Federal Government r in the election of Members to the House, and in the event that ' there was any disposition to change the form of Government · and deprive the Federal Government of its rights in the Congress of the United States, it _ would have the right to protect the Government of the United States. The debates on this · question were as voluminous as any other debates at the time the Constitution was adopted, and they reached a compromise 1 . so that you might preserve the Federal Government in its · sphere and you might protect the State government in its sphere. f The amendment says: - ! The e lec t ors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures. I Who, then , shall determine under the State constitution and ' the State regulation as to election of United States Senator whether a man is qualified and legally entitled to vote? If you pass a Federal election law, then the law of each State will be construed by a Federal court or it will be construed by. a Federal commissioner of elections, and when a qualified elector presents him s elf at the polls to vote his right to vote will not be determined by officers who are appointed and elected by the State legislature which made the law, by the people of the State who made the constitution, but the construction of that State constitution, the construction of the laws placed on the statute books by the State legislatures, will be construed and enforced by Federal officeholders. Why, gentlemen of the . House, I care not what you may write in the statutes of these States. I care not what constitutional provision you may have · in times of peace. It is in times of stress and storm and in times of political passion that we need some rock, some anchor and protection. · In such times, when the tempest of passion runs high and Congress becomes wild with partisanship and ignores the rights of the minority under the present system, the Supreme Court can protect this minority as it has done · - in the past, but if this amendment becomes a part of' the Constitution and the control of the election shall be in the bands of a brutal majority-put it, if you please, a brutal Demo ~ ratic majority, a brutal Republican majority, a brutal Soci <i listic majority-then these officers that shall be elected to fill these elective positions will determine whether these State laws have been complied with, and in so doing will, · of course, hold that they were, because their election would be by the same system, and the · Executive, being chosen by the same method, would also be biased, and though fraud was so rank tha.t it smelled to heaven the election would be declared regular.

I appeal to the membership of this House to be practical about it. Do not be demagogic. I am in favor of the election o f the United States Senators by direct vote of the people, but I want it to be by direct vote of the people of these States in accordance with their own will, in accordance with their own _ wishes, in accordance with their own constitution; and in order that we may have this you must have the election laws of each State administered by the people that make these · State constitutions and the State laws. And if the gentlemen call that demagogic, if you call that sophistry, then indeed you know nothing about how elections are conducted. No man will returned. tell me that the men .who fought at the other - end of . this Capitol so vigorously were fighting for nothing; no man will tell me, when you shall vote down the amendm e nt offered by the gentleman from Georgia [1\Ir. BARTLETT], that there is not a purpose somewhere to defeat the election of Senators by • direct . vote of the people by the States, which will de c line to surrender this power. ~ - If that be the purpose, if that be the object, if that be the aim, then you gentlemen who submit this amendment to the people will be looked upon as being enemies of elections of the United States Senators by direct vote of the people. Let us not, in God's name, place this chalice to the lips of the people of the States and ask them to drink it to the dregs. I ask that the State of Maine, of New Hampshire, of Vermont, shall have the sovereign right to determine whom they shall send to the Senate. But you take from them that right when you tell them: ".Although you may write your laws you have not the patriotism, you have not the interest , you have not the integrity to enforce them, but we will have the election held by a body that has nothing to do with the making of the laws, and shall have nothing to do with the selection of the officers who hold the election." What an anomaly !

Mr. Speaker, the people of the States should not adopt this amendment in its present form. To do so places all power in the Federal Government. It is not enough to say that t he Federal Congress will not exercise its power. · Every Member who has spoken on this question, save one or two have said that those of us who oppose the Bristow amendment are unnecessarily alarmed. They say that we are too easily frightened, and that this power will never be exercised, and that if they thought it would that they would be against this amendment. This is an admission that the Bristow amendment is unwise and dangerous. The surest way to prevent Federal control of elections of United States Senators is not to deprive the States of the power to control their own elections. When this amendment is submitted to the States they will be asked to surrender their power over the only branch of the Federal Government that they now control, and to place in the- Congre s of the United States the power to control the elections in the States. It is begging the question to say that Congress will never a mil itself of that power. If it will.never avail itself of that power it is because they ought not to have it.

Let us examine a moment and see what the amendment does. If adopted, Congress can appoint officers to take charge of the registration books of the States and determine who may or may not register under the State law. Congress can appoint officers to hold the elections, and allow those to vote whom these officers in their discretion should decide has the right to vote. These Federal officers of elections will count the votes and make certificates of election. Every Congressman and every Senator who . holds a certificate of election will hold it at the hands of those Federal officers. If the State election should happen on the same day, under the State constitution, then the Federal officers could hold in their hands the election machinery and actually control . our State elections .

I do not care who writes and makes the laws of a State if you will let me administer those laws. Gentlemen on the floor say that Congress can not fix the qualifications of voters. No; the State laws will do that. But who cares who makes the laws? It is a question of enforcement and administration. You leave the State the miserable privilege of writing her own statutes, but you degrade and humiliate her by depriving her of the right to have her own officers of her own elections to enforce these laws. You take away, or are, rather, asking · each State to surrender her only shield and buckler. You would ask in this amendment that these · States lie help-less and prostrate without a single weapon - pon of· defense against Federal encroachment. You say . that Congress ca:r;i now control, if it desires, . the election of Congressmen, and that for that reason the States should now be stripped of · an power of protection, and you would submit this amendment to them and ask them to throw themselves upon the mercy of Congress. Will they do it? Not if they understand the proposition.

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? .

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Mississippi yield to the gentleman from Kansas?

l\Ir. SISSON . . Yes. . . _

Mr. JACKSON. The gentleman does not believe it . would be possible, and be does not advocate any change in the Constitution that would prevent the Senate from being the judge of the qualifications of its own Members, does he?

Mr. SISSON. Oh, no. I say this: I want the Senate to be the judge of its own election after the election is made and

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. .

l\Ir. SISSON. l\Ir. Speaker, I ask for firn minutes more.

Mr. BARTLETT. I yield five minutes more to the gentleman.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman the from Mississippi [Mr. Sisson] is extended five minutes.

l\lr. JACKSON. Then the result would simply be that the fair Senate could keep out of its Chamber any man who was elected from any of those States, and there would not be any difficulty, would there, in denying the right of the State to representa­ have tion at all in the Senate?

all SISSON. I understand the gentleman's question, but the

State would still have the sovereign right to send whom she pleased. But if this amendment were adopted her laws would be construed, we will say, by a Democratic majority, and the President of the United States, vested with authority to appoint these election officers, would construe the law · of the States and would construe the qualifications of the electors of the States, and would determine who should and who should of not vote, and you would thereby deprive the States of one of their sovereign prerogatives and powers which they now . have.

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Mississippi yield to the gentleman · from Illinois?

Mr. SISSON. I do.

Mr. CANNON. Suppose a State or States refused to send Senators. Would not the Senate exist by virtue of some other Mr. MANN. authority than itself, and therefore-- . Mr . SISSON. Yes; and at the ·re . very beginning of the Government-and I am sure the gentleman is familiar with itthere was a fear expressed in the debates of the Constitutional tives; yes. Convention to the effect that Senators would not be sent to the Senate and that Members of the House would not be sent to does the House by their districts, and therefore, when they were discussing this matter in the original Constitutional Conven­ . tion, they made this compromise, that the Federal Government form might protect and preserve itself. But they did not go to the extent that some of the members of that convention desired to go at that time-notably those who followed Mr. Hamilton-to l\Ir. MANN. give the absolute right to the Federal Government to control absolutely the election of all Federal officers, but they got this compromise. They worked up a compromise, and my recollec­ hind tion is that Mr. Franklin, who was one of the great compromisers, evolved this _ plan and it finally went through.

Now, if you change this method, you would have the anoma­ have lous condition of one body politic making the law and another same body politic construing or enforcing the law. Now, it would be that in times of political storm-it would only be when the stress have was great-that a Federal election law could ever be passed. Mr. MANN. Then, as in war, thousands of things that would not be tolerated in time of peace would be tolerated, and the purpose of this Constitution is to protect people in their rights in time of stress say and storm.

Mr. HAMLIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

The SPEAKER pro tempore . Does the genOeman from · l\Iississi ppi yield to the gentleman from Missouri?

Mr. SISSON. I do.

Mr. HAMLIN. Does not the gentleman understand that the bill. only effect of the adoption of this conference report, if it should become a part of the Constitution, would be in his own to State to change the election of United States Senators from an election by the legislature to an election by the voters of the all · state?

l\Ir. SISSON. The gentleman knows little about the conten­ the tion if he contends that, because, under the present Constitution, you can not reach the electorate by any act of Congress. You can not · go back and lay violent hands on it. You can, so can far as the House of Representatives is concerned. But a State, if it is denied · the right to send Representatives to Congress, am can still elect, under her own law and legislature, her Senators, this and can send her Senators to the other end of the Capitol and am there protect the State in its rights, and there become a check shut on the brutal majority o~ this House.

I recall how the people of the South prayed, when 1\Ir. LODGE, of Massachusetts, introduced the force bill here, against its tend enactment. I recollect as a young man how we listened night on and day at the telegraph office for news of the result. I recall I how a Senator from my own State, who has passed away, Senator George, spoke for parts of three days against the bill; and I my recollect how they telegraphed to Senator Stewart, and the and wires , were quivering and vibrating with the intelligence that have Senator Stewart was on his way to the Capitol, although he have left a sick l>ed at his home to come; and when Senator Stewart, under the influence of Gov. Foote's daughter-that good Mississippi woman who nursed him in bis sickness-and who hurried on a special train from the West to this city and that great Republic an when he reached the Senate cast his vote against the force bill and killed the force bill; and I recollect rejoicing all over the South.

· And let me say to you that since we have had honest and elections in the South my own State has had miliions of dollars of northern capital invested within its boundaries, millions of dollars have gone into Mississippi, millions of dollars been spent for land, and millions of dollars have been in · ­ -vested in timber and land by people from Illinois and Ohio and Indiana and all the principal Northern States.

l\Ir. MANN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a question?