Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Solution Manual For Data Abstraction Problem Solving With C Walls and Mirrors 6 e 6th Edition Frank M Carrano Timothy Henry
Solution Manual For Data Abstraction Problem Solving With C Walls and Mirrors 6 e 6th Edition Frank M Carrano Timothy Henry
Solution Manual For Data Abstraction Problem Solving With C Walls and Mirrors 6 e 6th Edition Frank M Carrano Timothy Henry
REPUBLICAN. DEMOCRATIC.
REPUBLICAN. DEMOCRATIC.
We demand that every citizen of the We warn the people of our common
United States shall be allowed to cast country, jealous for the preservation of
one free and unrestricted ballot in all their free institutions, that the policy of
public elections and that such ballot Federal control of elections to which
shall be counted and returned as the Republican party has committed
cast; that such laws shall be enacted itself is fraught with the gravest
and enforced as will secure to every dangers, scarcely less momentous than
citizen, be he rich or poor, native or would result from a revolution
foreign born, white or black, this practically establishing a monarchy on
sovereign right guaranteed by the the ruins of the republic. It strikes at
Constitution. the North as well as the South, and
injures the colored citizen even more
The free and honest popular ballot, than the white; it means a horde of
the just and equal representation of deputy marshals at every polling place,
all the people, as well as their just armed with Federal power, returning
and equal protection under the laws, boards appointed and controlled by
are the foundation of our republican Federal authority; the outrage of the
institutions, and the party will never electoral rights of the people in the
relax its efforts until the integrity of several States; the subjugation of the
the ballot and the purity of elections colored people to the control of the
shall be fully guaranteed and party in power and the reviving of race
protected in every State. antagonisms, now happily abated, of
the utmost peril to the safety and
We denounce the continued inhuman happiness of all—a measure
outrages perpetrated upon American deliberately and justly described by a
citizens for political reasons in leading Republican Senator as “the
certain Southern States of the Union. most infamous bill that ever crossed
the threshold of the Senate.” Such a
policy, if sanctioned by law, would
mean the dominance of a self-
perpetuating oligarchy of office-
holders, and the party first intrusted
with its machinery could be dislodged
from power only by an appeal to the
reserved right of the people to resist
oppression which is inherent in all self-
governing communities. Two years ago
this revolutionary policy was
emphatically condemned by the people
at the polls; but, in contempt of that
verdict, the Republican party has
defiantly declared, in its latest
authoritative utterance, that its success
in the coming elections will mean the
enactment of the Force bill and the
usurpation of despotic control over
elections in all the States.
REPUBLICAN. DEMOCRATIC.
The first ballot for President resulted as follows, only one ballot
necessary, Weaver being successful:
Alabama, Weaver, 43, Arkansas, Weaver, 12; Kyle, 20; California,
Weaver, 25; Colorado, Weaver, 6; Kyle, 10; Connecticut, Weaver, 8;
Kyle, 2; Delaware, Weaver, 1; Florida, Weaver, 16; Georgia, Weaver,
16; Kyle, 39; Idaho, Weaver, 12; Illinois, Weaver, 41; Kyle, 42;
Indiana, Weaver 54; Kyle, 5; Norton, 1; Iowa, Weaver, 52; Kansas,
Weaver, 40; Kentucky, Weaver, 40; Louisiana, Weaver, 32; Maine,
Weaver, 6; Kyle, 3; Massachusetts, Weaver, 9; Kyle, 18; Page, 1;
Michigan, Weaver, 56; Minnesota, Weaver, 27; Kyle, 9; Mississippi,
Weaver, 17; Missouri, Weaver, 61: Kyle, 7; Montana, Kyle, 12;
Nebraska, Weaver, 23; Kyle, 3; Nevada, Kyle, 7; New Jersey, Weaver,
4; New York, Weaver, 59; North Carolina, Weaver, 20; Kyle, 5; North
Dakota, Weaver, 11; Kyle, 1; Ohio, Weaver, 30; Kyle, 22; Oregon,
Weaver, 16; Pennsylvania, Weaver, 29; Stanford, 1; South Dakota,
Weaver, 1; Kyle, 15; Tennessee, Weaver, 45; Texas, Weaver, 60;
Virginia, Weaver, 48; Washington, Weaver, 15; West Virginia,
Weaver, 17; Wisconsin, Weaver, 7; Kyle, 41; Wyoming, Weaver, 3;
District of Columbia, Weaver, 8; Oklahoma, Weaver, 8. Total:
Weaver, 995; Kyle, 265; Norton, 1; Page, 1; Stanford, 1.
Maryland, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, South Carolina,
Vermont, Alaska, Arizona, Indian Territory, New Mexico and Utah
are blank.
Norton moved to make the nomination unanimous, and Schilling,
of Wisconsin, Washburn, of Massachusetts, and the delegates from
South Dakota, Montana and Massachusetts seconded the motion. It
was carried with a hurrah and loud cheering.
General James G. Field, of Virginia, and of the Confederate
service, was nominated on the first ballot for Vice-President.
People’s Party Platform.
“Id rex potest,” says the law, “quod de jure potest.” The king’s
power is a power according to law. His commands, if the authority of
lord chief justice Hale may be depended upon, are under the
directive power of the law; and consequently invalid, if unlawful.
“Commissions,” says my lord Coke, “are legal; and are like the king’s
writs; and none are lawful, but such as are allowed by the common
law, or warranted by some act of parliament.”
And now, sir, let me appeal to the impartial tribunal of reason and
truth; let me appeal to every unprejudiced and judicious observer of
the laws of Britain, and of the constitution of the British government;
let me appeal, I say, whether the principles on which I argue, or the
principles on which alone my arguments can be opposed, are those
which ought to be adhered to and acted upon; which of them are
most consonant to our laws and liberties; which of them have the
strongest, and are likely to have the most effectual tendency to
establish and secure the royal power and dignity.
Are we deficient in loyalty to his majesty? Let our conduct convict,
for it will fully convict, the insinuation that we are, of falsehood. Our
loyalty has always appeared in the true form of loyalty; in obeying
our sovereign according to law; let those, who would require it in any
other form, know, that we call the persons who execute his
commands, when contrary to law, disloyal and traitors. Are we
enemies to the power of the crown? No, sir, we are its best friends:
this friendship prompts us to wish, that the power of the crown may
be firmly established on the most solid basis: but we know, that the
constitution alone will perpetuate the former, and securely uphold
the latter. Are our principles irreverent to majesty? They are quite
the reverse: we ascribe to it perfection almost divine. We say, that the
king can do no wrong: we say, that to do wrong is the property, not of
power, but of weakness. We feel oppression, and will oppose it; but
we know, for our constitution tells us, that oppression can never
spring from the throne. We must, therefore, search elsewhere for its
source: our infallible guide will direct us to it. Our constitution tells
us, that all oppression springs from the ministers of the throne. The
attributes of perfection, ascribed to the king, are, neither by the
constitution, nor in fact, communicable to his ministers. They may
do wrong; they have often done wrong; they have been often
punished for doing wrong.
Here we may discern the true cause of all the impudent clamor and
unsupported accusations of the ministers and of their minions, that
have been raised and made against the conduct of the Americans.
Those ministers and minions are sensible, that the opposition is
directed, not against his majesty, but against them; because they
have abused his majesty’s confidence, brought discredit upon his
government, and derogated from his justice. They see the public
vengeance collected in dark clouds around them: their consciences
tell them, that it should be hurled, like a thunderbolt, at their guilty
heads. Appalled with guilt and fear, they skulk behind the throne. Is
it disrespectful to drag them into public view, and make a distinction
between them and his majesty, under whose venerable name they
daringly attempt to shelter their crimes? Nothing can more
effectually contribute to establish his majesty on the throne, and to
secure to him the affections of his people, than this distinction. By it
we are taught to consider all the blessings of government as flowing
from the throne; and to consider every instance of oppression as
proceeding, which, in truth, is oftenest the case, from the ministers.
If, now, it is true, that all force employed for the purposes so often
mentioned, is force unwarranted by any act of parliament;
unsupported by any principle of the common law; unauthorized by
any commission from the crown; that, instead of being employed for
the support of the constitution and his majesty’s government, it must
be employed for the support of oppression and ministerial tyranny; if
all this is true (and I flatter myself it appears to be true), can any one
hesitate to say, that to resist such force is lawful; and that both the
letter and the spirit of the British constitution justify such resistance?
Resistance, both by the letter and the spirit of the British
constitution, may be carried further, when necessity requires it, than
I have carried it. Many examples in the English history might be
adduced, and many authorities of the greatest weight might be
brought to show, that when the king, forgetting his character and his
dignity, has stepped forth, and openly avowed and taken a part in
such iniquitous conduct as has been described; in such cases, indeed,
the distinction above mentioned, wisely made by the constitution for