The Crisis in Congress -- Duty of the
Majority Richmond, Virginia, Enquirer [Democratic](15 May 1854)
The country contemplates the progress of the
present extraordinary struggle in the House of Representatives
with intense anxiety, not simply because
its result will determine the fate of the Nebraska bill,
but because it involves also the infinitely more
momentous issue of the stability of the Union. The
course of the minority who oppose a factious resistance
to the progress of the public business, and
thwart the well-ascertained will of Congress by
violence, is rebellion against the spirit and intent, if not
against the forms of Republican government; and
must terminate, if successful, in disunion and civil
tumult. It is not contemplated in the theory nor is it
thought possible in the practice of our institutions,
that the passions of a faction should prevail over the
will of the majority, and the moment such an event
happens the supremacy of law and the authority of
government are overthrown. One instance of
successful repetition of the experiment, and the government
would be at the mercy of faction. And this,
upon the courage and firmness of the true men who
have so resolutely stood against the revolutionary
resistance of a faction in the House of Representatives,
the stability of the government and the destiny
of the Union depend. We can have no doubt of the
issue of the struggle. We cannot believe that Congress
will betray the interests of the Union into the
hands of faction. We believe the majority appreciate
the responsibility of their position, and that their
conduct will justify the hopes of the country. But
they cannot triumph with their present tactics.
Extreme cases demand extreme remedies, and it becomes
the duty of the majority, if necessary, to repel
violence by violence, and to trample under foot the
arbitrary formalities of parliamentary law, rather than
suffer them to be converted into an engine in the
hands of faction for the overthrow of the
government. There is a great law of self-defence above all
conventional regulations, which not only justifies but
demands the disregard of ordinary restraints, if
necessary to the execution of its supreme decree. The
principle of the power of the majority is essential to
the authority of government, and should not be
sacrificed to those technical rules which are ordained for
the protection of the rights of a minority. The stability
of the Union and the welfare of the country
are the ends for which government was instituted,
and it would be absurd and suicidal to suffer any
overscrupulous regard for mere incidents and accessories
to defeat the great object of our political system.
The regulations of parliamentary law are designed
to facilitate legislation -- shall they be perverted
to the purposes of a factious obstruction? Let the
majority cut the gordian knot. Let them appeal to
the ultimate end of government and to the supreme
law of self-defence against the revolutionary
resistance of the minority. If that majority will resort to
the bold expedient of suspending or overruling those
subordinate and arbitrary forms of parliamentary
proceeding, of which faction avails itself to carry out
its mischievous purposes, the country will ratify and
applaud the conservative innovation and the salutary
irregularity.
[<<Previous Editorial][Next Editorial>>]
|
