Rensselaer Union, Volume 9, Number 34, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 10 May 1877 — Common-Sense For Republicans. [ARTICLE]

Common-Sense For Republicans.

1. Let it not be forgotten that a continuance of the “military policy” for more than a few weeks longer at the most was an absolute impossibility. The old appropriations for tbe support of the army are now exhausted. The demooratio party has a majority in the next house, as it had in the last, and it is absolutely certain that that body will refuse to pass an Army Appropriation bill if the troops are to used for political purposes in the south. Whatever may be our present views as to the propriety of such a line of action on their part, there is no doubt that the fact 1* as we have stated it; and it is also true that the democrats ean find a precedent for suoh a course in a like action upon the part of the republicans in the early days of their party, when the army was being used to help the border ruffians in Kansas. The similarity of the cases lies only in the assertion of congressional power involved, but with this precedent, and with the present peculia r condition of national politics, it is certain that the army would have ceased to exist for any purpose if the president had attempted to make the “military policy” a feature of his administration. He would have been left powerless to continue it, and those who blame him for seeking some new line of action virtually say that he should have attempted the impossible. 2. In the same connection let it be remembered that in the past, when sustained by a friendly congress, “the military policy” has entirely failed to secure the end which is its sole justification, viz : The protection of the colored man in his rights. Hamburg, Coushatta, Colfax, and other horrible massacres took place while the troops were scattered through the South. The Ku-Klux, the rifle-clubs, and the bulldozers existed in murderous activity under the military regime. The old southern policy was' productive in irritation and in inflaming race hatred, but it only yielded a protection which signally failed to protect. 3. Ffom the foregoing statement comes the conclusion that if congress could be relied upon to support “the military policy,’ 1 it could only be made effective by at least quadrupling the army and* substantially garrisoning the south. In other words, the soldiers should be detailed for police duty throughout that section in such numbers that every hamlet cop!d have its armed guard. Such a plan alone would secure adequate protection for the blacks, but it would involve (if congress should assent) an annual burden of ten millions ofdollars, under which the taxpayers would have steadily grown more and more restive. Does any one believe that the people could have been held up to the steady support of so cosily a policy? This we suggest, not as an argument, but as bringing in the consideration of an important question of fact. 4. If the subject is to be considered from the standpoint of expediency, it is plain that the use of the troops in the south on the old plan would not prevent that section from becoming solidly democratic. What reason is there to suppose that South Carolina and Louisiana, even if Chamberlain and Packard could have been held in power by tbe bayonet, would not have yielded during the coming four yeara to the political forces which have subverted republican rule in their sister states? Every probability points to such a result of the struggle there, if it had been continued as heretofore.

5. The legal aspect of the subject ought not to be ignored. The president has taken an oath to support the constitution and execute the laws. The first-named instrument says: Art. 1., Sec. B.—The congress shall have p0wer........ to provide for calling forth the malitia to execute tbe laws of tbe Union, suppress insurrections and reftel invasions. Art. IV., Seo. 4.—The United States shall guarantee to every state in tbe Union a republican form of government, aud shall protect each of them against Invasion, and, on application of the legislature or the executive (when the legislature cannot be assembled), against domestic violence. The laws of congress, passed to carry these sections into effect, says: In case of an Insurrection In any state against the governor thereof, it shall be lawful for tbe president, on application of the legislature of auch state, or of the executive when the legislature cannot be convened, to employ such part of th«* land or naval forces of the United States as he deems necessary. It is not possible under these provisions to justify the policing of a

stale, tbe stationing ot a corporal's guard at its polling-places, and the permanent garrisoning of statehouses by United States troops yet that is what a continuance of “the military policy” on any effective plan means. The spirit of our institutions, the decision of onr courts, and intelligent public sentiment are hostile to such a course. The United States guarantees to every "state a republican form of government. That does not and cannot, bo scoured by a perpetual occupation of a state cnpitol by national soldiery Detroit Tribune.