Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

Lhejuezliurioh times. f" * "y ?!-j"^;v'_' ?T"*\t^ "-" ^", C^iP J^^^ji" ? '"""*' *" ?- - - ?- ?- -- - - *?- ^ j? VOL. X.-Nf-w Series. ~ UNION C. H., SOtmT^BOt^||. JUNE 20, 1S79. NUMBER 25. HAIPTOS'8 QBE AT SPEECH. | might opeu the Constitution nntL rcadin* lTatif?n? tn 1 Mr. Hampton : Mr. President, I beg to acknowledge my obligation to the, souator from Delaware (Mr. Buyardj) for the courfr tcsy which enable* me .'to submit a few re-. marks to the Senate ; and iu. taking up. the b bill which he has laid before the Senate, I t do not propose to discunss it specially; I rather prefer to ntake general remarks* up; ' ' * on the subjects which havo been under dis_ oassion during this session. The main reason why I do not desiro to speak particularly to this bill la that I can , hardly suppose there is a senator on this iiii](iiPfRv4ho nutate iKK)F ouo or tho * #*HStinfamous laws which have over disgraced legislation. It ia simply to strike off a law which was plaocd there, if not by mistake, by fraud, and I thereforo do not feol that it is necessary for me to enter into (he discussion further thau simply to give an illustration of how the present law can be used to tyrannise ever the people of the country. In the recent trials in th? ITn!fj>/l Circuit Court at Charleston a short time ago, a jury was summoned. Ono of tho judges who was on the bench could not take the test oath. The district attorney had been in the Confederate Army ; the assistant attorney had likewiso been in that army. They of course could not take the test oath. And yet when the jurors were brought up every Democrat had that oath applied to himj while all men who were not Democrats, men who had served through the whole war, if they were Republican), were allowed to take their places upon that jury without having the oath administered to them. I think it is not neocssary to say anything more to show tho impropriety, to say tho least, of allowing a law of that sort to stand. There arc many reasons which make me reluctant to obtrude my views on tho Senate at this time. I recognize fully the propriety of that unwritten rule of the Senate which imposes silence upon tho now aud inexperienced members of this body until they have become familiar by association with tho experience of their older and wiser colleagues. The physical disability under L?l T t % wuica x ittDor noc ODiy makes all exertion painful to me, but unfits uio to do justice oither to tbe great questions now pending or to inysclf, and I cannot, therofore, address, the Scnato at length. Nor is is necessary to do so. Argument, rhotorio, invective and denunciation havo been exhausted by our opponents, aud I can scarcely hope that any utterances of mine will allay the prejudices which havo been aroused or carry conviction to the minds of tbe people. These are potent reasons to enforce my silence, and uuder ordinary circumstances I should havo adhered to my determination to take no part in the debates of this session. But the subjects which have engaged the attention of Congress and of the country during the present session are not of ordinary importance, and the tone and temper of the debate, which has been prolonged through weoks of vehement and angry denunciation, impose upon the reDresuntutives of the South at least. THE DUTY OP HONEST PROTEST. Against my wishes, therefore, and under every disadvantage imposed upon uie by my physical condition, ? must, as ono of those representatives, ask the indulgence of the Senate whilo I place upon record my earnest protest agaiust tho injustice and the unfairness with which wo have been treated. Tho Presidint/>ro tempore: Tho Chair would state to tho Senator from South Carolina that if at any titno it would bo more convenient for him to speak sitting he is at jwrfect liberty to do so. Mr. Hampton : I thank you, sir. Day a tier day havo wo listened while acoatorc of groat reputation, high ability, and whose words are the croed of thousands of conscientious and patriotio citiaens have denounced the opinions and actions of Southern men as revolutionary and treasonable. It has boon declared that the Democratic caucus rules tho Senate, and that the Southern members rule the caucus, dictating the policy to be pursued. The nblo and distinguished senator from Ohio (Mr. Thurmao) with equal truth, justice and candor has, it is true, mot and refuted that Charge by assumiog for the Northern and Western Democracy the responsibility of the present politioal situation. But in spite of this generous assumption of responsibility on his psrt, the truth still remains that we of the South do make the Demooratio at.:- ? ? - ( Bjurivj in tins vuauiocr, ana we are tnus as responsible for what we approve and support as for what we suggest. I have not the presumption to make any claim to leadership here, bat while not attempting to lead it is my duty to know where and whom I follow, and for any vote which I may cast here I shall never endeavor to shield myself from responsibility behind any man or any party. If the policy I support is revolutionary, I am the revolutionist: if there is treason in my voto, I am the traitor. But, sir, L ask iu all seriousness, what are tbo issues before the Senate to which such language is appropriated ? 1 might doinand of senators on the other side the proof that any action of ours was revolutionary ; I its precis? and emphatic definition to treason, nek who of us is "levying war against tbo United States or giving aid and comfort to, their enemies," or what overt act of violence we aro proposing to commit ? But -1 do not desire to anake a more technical ; argument. 1 desire to moot the accusation in its spirit as well as in its letter. WHAT ARE TIIE ISSUES BEFORE US ? Lc|, us understand them distinctly. But first let me say WMN are not the issues we are discussing. To me there is no question; there can be none, as to the propriety ^^arh^^^^^p^n^Ws^point there shall be no misapprehension of my position. By no voto of mine will the appropriations necessary for the efficient maintenance of tho army bo rofusod. It is competent for Congress to decl?ro under what limitations and upon what conditions tho appropriation is to be made. The form in which this is dono I regard as immaterial In my judgment it would have been best to adhere to the usual form ; but as it has bcon deemed advisable to maka the necessary appropriations in another manner, I shall, in order to secure unanimity, acquiesce in the decision of the majority. But iu no event cnu I consent to aid iu disbanding tho aruiv or in impairing its efficiency. It is tho army of the South as well as of tho North ; it is the army of the whole country. In its history, from the days of tho revolution through its achievements of 1812 and the glories of the Mexican war, I have some reason, by right of birth and of blood, to be proud.? In the lute civil contest, on mauy a bloody field, I tested its valor, and no word nor aot of mine shall dcpreciato its value or lessen its usefulness. But because I so regard it no act of uiiue shall teud to degrade its rank and file into a police squad nor convert its officers into detectives. I will not so legislate that against its owu honorable instincts and traditions it shall be. the instrument of tyranny iu the hand of a factious party or of an executive who might be so unscrupulous as to use it unlawfully. Nor shall I consent, becauso of any difference of sopinion upou matters of legislation between the majority and tho minority or bctwocn the majority and the President, to close the courts of justice, stop tho administration of the departments and embarrass the necessary and orderly life of the Government. The Constitution, which I have not idly sworn to support, has provided a means by which on appeal to the country can be tuken, and it is for the people to decide whether the Presidential veto has been wisely and patriotically used to defeat the will of this Congress which represents a vast majority of the citizens of the United States. My duty will have been performed when I have used all the power with which that Constitution has entrusted mo. The President and tho minority iu Congress must be respousiblc for the use of theirs.? And while these arc my general views of uiy duty, I cortainly have no inducement, no disposition, to embarrass the present administration. It is a sourco of profound regret to me that the President could not Ond himself ablo to approve the bills ho has vetoed. To me they seem to embody but simple declarations of constitutional principles, and to be in entire conformity with the policy which ho has announced rcpeatodly ns the ono that he would pursue. Hut I am not disposed on account of this difference, grave though it be, to denounce his action nor to impugn his motives. I am well aware that his position is not easy nor his responsibility light. I remember, and the peoplo whom I represent remember, that in A CRITICAL PERIOD OP OUR HISTORY, in disregard of tbo passions and in opposition to the wishes of the party who placed him in his present position, with doubt as to tho result of his independent action, moved, as 1 honestly believe, by his couvietions of duty, he withdrew the Federal troops from tho State-Houses of South Carolina and Louisiana, thus enabling thfe people of iboso States to restoro their local governments to thoso who represent the popular will, as well &s the oharaeter, the intelligence, and the property of tho two States. For this action, wise and patrioiio as I am sure that history will record it, I for one am grateful. And while in the honest and necessary party differences which must arise in a free country it will be my duty, with all the energy and ability I possess, to opposo the partisan policy of which he is the representative, my opposition shall not be captious. Nor shall 1 by bitter and acrimonious oersure driv* him intn <i?n?n. -Vf ? denco on those who would in thoir selfish rush for power trample ou hiui and oo us. I trust, thorefore, in what I have to say that I shall be able to speak with truth and soberness. What, then, let me ask again, aro the issues before tbo country upon which any notion ot ours can be called revolutionary or treasonable ? If the repealing acts whiob have boon suggested were pissod to day, we should simply be remanded to the legislation under which the chun'ry has lived and moved and had its being for aovonty five years of its existence. Can such a restoration bo revolution or treason ? Surely not, unless the intervoning war has so changed our reI -v whvm v?I?K mittl kUU Wl WU8111U tiouul legislation is bo longer flmH cable u our condition ; aud yet this, i* fttlly wba senators on Iho other sido woulKlyfete th< country believe. I ask, in all OjMM^vrouh such legislation as w? now scwuM {cpea have been conceived or defb^H^^pT. an] statesman before the late war tjMfjpfd an] Prcsidont from 1789 to iSftjOvijfr havt dreamed of sodding the arjny^rox&pitec States to keep .the peace at IB ftdpejor ol appointing Federal superv^|?n#nufTihali to superintend the popular fc^ltotf If not then the necessity for the maintenance oi this legislation arises from ^wtythfaig nee IV In nny* senator ^WtouTVhat that new clement is f If any exist, what is tho dif fore nee in tho relations a State holds to the Union lo-day and those of the sauio State before the war ? If there is uono, and 1 venture to say that none can be pointed out, wherein consists the necessity for any such legislation to-day which did not exist then? This question should, I think, be fairly answered, because it is the point upon which the accusatious against the South rest. If all that we ask is what existed for threoquartern of a ceutury of our existence, how can it be revolutionary or treasonable to make this demaud ? If the Democratic doctrine that Federal troops cannot lawfully be used at the polls, or cauuot interfere in State matters uuless specially requested to do so uy tne constituted authorities of a State be a heresy, we have the strongest republican authority to sustain thdt horsy. In his message to the Legislature of Pennsylvania, iu January, 1871, GOVERNOR JOHN W. GEARY used the following language : "The employment of troops of the United States at elections, without the consent of the local and State governments, has already received considerable attention and reprehension. * * * Uudcr any circumstances, in my opinion, it is unsafe nud antagonistic to the principles that should govern our Republican institutions. At the last October elections, United States troops were stationed in Philadelphia for the avowed purpose of enforcing the election laws. This wes done without the conscut or even the knowledge of the civil authorities of oither the city or the Stato, and without any expressed desire on the part of the citizens, and, as far as cat) be ascertained, without existing necessity." Tho Deinocratio party stands to-day where Governor Geary, a staunch Republican, stood then. Nor are wn other and equally as high Republican authority to sustaiu the position taken by our party. Hon. CAllL CIIUKZ, now a distinguished member of the present Cabinet, in his place ou this floor, made this memorable protest against the scandalous aud unconstitutional use of Federul soldiery in Louisiana : "United Statos soldiers, with fixed bayonets, decided the cine against them, and took them out of tho legislative hall by forco. * * * I cannot, therefore, cs cape from the deliberate conviction, a conviction conscientiously formed, that the deed douo on tho 4th of Jauuary, in the StateI " iiuuso oi jxiuuioa, by tbo military forces of tho United States, constitutes a gross aud manifest violation of tho Constitution and laws of this Republic. * * * If this can be done in Louisiana, and if such thiugs be sustained by Congress, how long will it bo before it can be done in Massachusetts and Ohio. Ho who in a place like ours fails to stop, or even justifies a blow at the fundamental laws of the land, makes himself the accoui-> plice of those who striko at the life of the Kepublio and at the liberties of tho people." The preseutable secretary of State, MR. EVAKT8, in hi* frrAAfc ?n??oK nn ? ~ ?--? a. vu >nv OUUIB BUUJCUl lU New York, waa even more emphatic than his colleague iu tbe Cabinet, and his words could well bo adopted now to formulate tbe creed of the Democratic party. Ho used tbo following laogaage: "Whoa inea vote, and wbeo tbeir chosen t officers meet, and when without violence and without demonstration of insurrection ;hoy undertake to conduct the affairs of their political government, no soldiers can interfere. There are two very distinct firm lines of limitation, which observed will protect tho machinery of the government for the people to-day ; that is, thut the sole intervention of tho Federal power within Stato authority shall be to suppress violence, and that their offico after that shall not assume to go further unless when invited by the SUnretnA ailthnriliF nf tlifl ? ... w? ?UV UMIbU* What use is it to give the purse and the sword to th3 House of Commons if the King or the President by military power oau determine what shall be the constitution of the House of Commons or the House of Congress ? And that is what thev fought for in England. * * * And for this reason the people of the United Slates are justified in assuming that the su preme civil power shall dominate over the military, and that no merging of them 01 interference with them shidl be permitted.' Now, Mr. President, shall we be do nouueed simply booause we plant ourselves not only where the fathers of the Repnb iio stood, but where the great lights of the ) Republican party have declared the only t true constitutional position can bo found '{ > Now, sir, I venture to assert that underly1 ing tbe whole argument on the other side I aro two assumptions: first, that the war f has so developed the independent existence f of the Federal Govermuout, as distinguished i from tho States, as to give it greater power, 1 larger influence, and more direct iuterest F in Congressional elections than it possessed I before; second, that the Administration, as , tbe representative -of that party which elccF ted it and in control of the Federal machinr L?ry? is bound to use that power and iuflui? ?Qn*in the protection of these interests.? ' In other words, that the privileges and pre rogatives of the States are to bo obliterated, i not by force,but by the subtler though uotless > destructive influences of two great national parties using tho powers of the Federal , Goveruuicut as weapons of party warfare. Now, I do not propose to make any constitutional argument on this subject. It is sufficient for me to say that I hold the fobm and character of our government to have been unaltered by the late war, and that the mutual relations of the General Government and the several States of the Union remain precisely as they were when the Union was formed. I hold that tho recent constitutional amendments have wrought no change in these rela- , tions j and in theso views. 1 urn sustained I by tbe ianguago of the Supreme Court of the United States in tlio case of the Collector vs. Day, reported io the eleventh Wallace. In this case, Justice Nelson, in delivering the opinion of the Court, used the followiug language : The general government and the State, although both exist within the sauie tentorial limits, arc separate and distinct sovereignties. acting separately and independently of each other within their respective spheres. In the same decree the eusuing words are used : Such being the scrarate and independent condition of the States in our complex system, as recognized by the Constitution, and | the existence of which is so iudispcusablc that without them the General Government itself would disappear from the family of nations, &c. I maintain, therefore, that TUB CONSTITUTION HAS NOT UBKN CIJA.NOKD in its essential features, by the lute amcudmcuts, and that it is therefore uow .vhat it was before the war, so that when the country demanded the preservation of the Union by a restoration of the States it meant such a Union and such States as the Constitution recognized. Con any advocate of a strong government, which is but another term for centralization, suppose for one instant that the founders of our Itepublic contemplated or would- have countenanced the exercise of such powers by the Federal Ooveruincnt ue are claimed for it by the y legislation ifo are seeking to repeal ? Does 1 any senator here believe that this is a - safe, a wholesome condition of public affairs ? ' Putting aside all extreme theories of State rights, docs not every senator recognize the fact that one of the elements of our political safety has been the manner in which local State interests buveacted aud reacted within the States upon national politics, so that uutil just before the war we never have had greut national patics which divided the country between them simply on Federal issues. Local influences had always to be considered. But if in the future we arc to have only great national parties in behalf of one or the other of which the administration is to interfere directly, we arc on the high road to a consolidation even more dangerous because more violent aud variable than a recognized change in the gov eminent. My objoction, therefore, to this legislation which the war called forth is not its immediate danger. It is not the actual army whiojiUcar.or its diraa* iaflwo*?_ But f do most strenuously object to any | legislation which affords any excuse or jus-, tification to the government that it has the right or interest in any way or in any dc-1 grce to interfere with the perfect freedom ' of elections. The roughness or even riot of an election is no greater than any other violation of the peace ; and no State in this ' Union is without ample means of suppression. And if the State authorities are unablo or uuwilling to do their duty, you have not now, you will not have for generations to COme. an nrmv Stronw nnniio-h trw tolro F J O O" their place. It is better so ; better that in one or two great cities, nay, in one or two i great States, there should be temporary turbulence, confusion, than that in the whole i country there should bo military despotism, i Congress has the right to decide who shall > take his seat as representative and who . shall take his seat as representative and i who shall not. Congrese oan r PUNISH WITH DISFRANCHISEMENT I any community whioh would force into i these halls an improperly eloctcd member ; - and that is a safer, a aurer, a more consti) tutiooal safeguard than the exeroise of any doubtful or unlawful power by the Federal ' Government. But, Mr. President, unjust as have been , the assumptions against tho South to which I havo alluded, there are othen not less grave. There has run through this whole discussion the strong and steady currcut of insinuation that the South is not true to the Uniou ; that its object in prcssiug tho repeal of those measures which wo deem dangerous to our liberties is to give us a freer field for conspiracy and a better opportunity to suppress by force aud fraud tho real voice of the Southern people. We arc tauntingly told that proof of these charges is fouud in the presence on this floor of twenty-two members who served iit the Confederate aruiy, and the South is reproached, nay, deuouueed, for scudiug such men to represent her here. Sir, the auswer to this charge is simple. Nearly every man in the South who could bear arms was in ber armies, and she caii soarcely be reproached with justice for trusting an-l honoring iu ponce the uicu who risked their fortunes and their lives for her iu war. And when the fact is cited that while the South sends so uiany of her old soldiers to represent her iu this august assembly the North scuds but four, 1 submit that the reproach, rest if reproach anywheres, belongs father to the North than, to the South. I feci that I but speak the scntiuicnts^>f every mau here whowas in the Confederate service when I express my deep regret that there are not in this Chamber more of the mcu who mot us in battle, for if opposed tous politically they would, if true soldiers and gentlemen, treat us with the respect hravp inp.n never fail to accord to cachi other. And, sir, had these great ! armies which for four years confronted each, other in a death grapple been left to uinko and enforce the terms of tuw?> *>?i? __ t >?? would the country have been spared much, of the suffering aud the humiliation it has experienced, hut it would have enjoyed a peace honorable uliko to the conquerors aud couquercd. We should long ere this have seen a Union re-established on the basis of FRATERNAL RECONCILIATION, and a whole people bound together by tho i indissoluble bonds of mutual respect, common inteicsts, and a common destiny. Such, at least, is the firm couvictiou of ovo,ry true soldier in the South, aud all her.sons were soldiers. Nor is this convictionwautiug among the brave soldiers of the North, for I have heard it expressed by themtime nnd again. That the men who truly represent tho South are here to-day is due mainly to our friends on the other side. When you insisted that the States should return to tho Union; when you called upon thcui to scud back their representatives, did you meanwhat you said or did you mean the Southern States to be rotten boroughs-to be filled1, by nominations of the republican party ?.? | Indeed, did you not for fifteen years make them so ? And I will leave it to the candor of ltep lblicau senators to say whether, they arc satisfied with the result of the experiment they made at such a friirhtful cost to us and to tho whole country. NVc arc here because we do represent the popular majority, the character, the intelligence andthe property of tho States which have scut us. We are here because, left to themselves,, the insticts of the recently enfranchised votors have taught them that their interestsare identical with ours. Wo arc here because, belonging to your own race, trained, iu the same political experience as your own, taught by years of rule how to govern, we could not be subordinated, and the people of the conutry did not wish us to bo subordinated, to such a mass of ignorant voters as you had rashly and suddenly created. We are here, we trust, for the good of the whole country. What wo wcro you knew when you insistod that we should'still bo part and parcel of this Union. I For the past you cannot expeeb us to | apologize ; to ao 80 would be to sacrifice our own self-respect and to forfeit the respect of all honorabio men. IN THE IIEAT OF CONFLICT . wo atrufll' hard blauu. and doubtless ,WO spoke hard words. But docs remembering or repeating them now bring us any nearer to the peace and harmony for which the whole country so ardently longs? The men who served iYi the opposing armies are now the strongest advocates of a true reconciliation. We learned in a common school how to respect our enemies ; we learned that personal courage and honor and' truth wero better guarantees of patrioiis n than constitutional learning or eloquent speech ; wo learned at least that in spite of differences, oven unto death, there was a common country which we could better servo in friendship than in hatred, aud' were our antagonists of the late war here to day, in the contests on this floor as in ficrcier battles of yore, whoever might bo tho victor, wo should be assured of a fair field and au honest suirender. [Applause in the gallo riea.j tfudgo us Dioro by our sots The presiding officer (Mr. Wallace in tho chair:) The Senator will suspend. Tho Chair given notice that if further npplauso occurs in the galleries ho will order thetu to bo cleared. Order must bo preserved. Mr. riumpton: Judgo us now by our acts; and again I ask what arc they to provoke distrust'/ We ask you to striko from tho statute-book legislation wbich was as much the instrument of war, tbo expression of di?] CoHftuftffi on 4th Ilngr.]