Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 2.djvu/383

 LEGAL ASPECT OF THE SOUTHERN QUESTION, 365

elections. The Constitution ^ says that " the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each State by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time, by law, make or alter such regulations, except as to the place of choosing senators." As a matter of speculation it may be said that Congress would probably have had sofne power to control federal elections without such express provision ; for, in the event of a State's refusing to provide for an election, it is not likely that the resources of the Constitution would fail to preserve the government.

In early days it was thought that the power could be exercised only when necessity demanded. Hamilton apparently saw merely a reservation of a right to the national govemm,ent " to interpose whenever extraordinary circumstances might render that interpo- sition necessary to its safety.'* ^ At all events, it was thought that the power would not be exerted unless occasion absolutely re- quired.* It has since been settled, however, that congressional action is not thus limited. In 1842 an election law was passed providing for the election of representatives by districts, but, owing to the great opposition of the States and an adverse report by Stephen A. Douglas as to its constitutionality, it remained a dead letter till 1862, when it was reenacted.* In 1872 came the act fixing the time for election of representatives on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November.^ It is hard to see why Con- gress may not at will prescribe the times, places, and manner of holding federal elections.

Some doubt may arise as to what is a regulation of the " man- ner" of holding an election. "Times " and "places'* are precise terms ; but " manner " is necessarily vague. Is it part of the " manner " that an election shall be orderly, that there shall be no intimidation, bribery, prevention from voting, or violence of any kind } Without attempting to be very precise, one can say that Congress may make any provision that can justly be said

^ Art. I., sec. 4.


 * Federalist, No. 59.

Edmunds Resolutions^ 8 Cong. Rec. 998 ( 1879). The State of North Carolina refused to ratify the Constitution unless the power of Congress was expressly limited. Seven out of thirteen States protested against the clause.
 * I Story Comm. (3d ed.), § 816. See also the remarks of Senator Wbyte on the


 * Rev. St., § 23.


 * Rev. St., § 25.