tion of public duty, that, as I am approaching
four score years, I have, almost without an exception, the
good will of my countrymen, certainly if I may trust what
they tell me when I meet in private intercourse men from different
parts of the country, or what they are saying of me just now
in the press. But it is quite possible that I may say or
do something before I get through which will change all that.
So whether my sunset, which is to come very soon, is to be
clear or under a cloud, it is impossible even to guess.
During this period I have taken a leading part in all questions
affecting the security of the right of suffrage conferred
by the Constitution of the United States on the colored people,
of honesty in elections, of questions affecting disputed titles
to seats in the Senate, and the extension of suffrage to women.
A very interesting question, now happily almost forgotten,
came up at the December session of 1878, and was renewed at
the following March session of 1879.
In 1878 the Democrats had a majority in the House of Representatives,
while the Republicans had the Presidency and the Senate. In
March, 1879, there was a Democratic majority in the Senate
and in the House, but a Republican President. The Democratic
Party chafed exceedingly under the National laws for securing
the purity of elections and for securing impartial juries
in the courts of the United States. In the December session
of 1878, the House inserted a provision repealing these laws.
They insisted, in conference, on keeping in this provision,
and refused to consent to the passage of the Executive, Legislative
and Judicial Appropriation Bill, unless the Senate and the
President would yield to their demand. Mr. Beck of Kentucky,
one of the conferrees on the part of the Senate, representing
what was then the Democratic minority, but what became at
the March session the majority, stated the doctrine of the
House, as announced by their conferrees--adding that he agreed
with it--that unless the States should be allowed to conduct
their own elections in their own way, free from all Federal
interference, they would refuse under their Constitutional
right to make appropriations to carry on the Government.
This was in defiance of the express provision of the Constitution
that Congress might at any time alter the regulations prescribed
by the State Legislatures as to time, place and manner of
holding elections for Senators and Represen
|