The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-08-28
THE DAILY EVENING Observation-Disclosures I

point, we are required TO consider the peculiar
circumstances arising out Of rhe conflict o. Iloca
ffclals, and the culpably vacillating conduct o
Governor Wells. 30 l. Sheridan and Baird held
what we OF the North are apt to cOnsidef the
common sense opinion upon the question Of In
reference. Tkey evidently thought that some
overt act should be waited for before proceeding
against the conventIonists. In New York the
meeting OF score OF Wendell Phillipses would
would be deemed harmless affair, and why not
in New Orleans2 An answer must be sought in
the difference that exists between the circum.
stances OF the Two cities. That which might be
attempted with impunlty in New York might
be pregnant with mischief IN New Orleans. 0Of
this the local officials were the proper Judges,
They saw an attempt to bring together those
whom Sheridan represents as political agta-
tors and revolutionary men,n to do what the
same distinguished soldier asserts was "liable to
produce breaches of the public peacer
They considered the assemblage illegally con-
vened for an unlawful and revolutionary pur-
pose. They knew, moreover, that the Conven-
tlOn was made an occasion for addressing
nhammatory harangues to negro crowds, for
advising the negroes TO arm themselves and for
fomenting i'll feeling between different classes
oi the community. Hence a determination was
arrived at to remove the causes of danger by
arresting the delegates IN due legal form, after
the act OF reassembling should have been
consummatcd. Up TO this stage there was
neliher violence nor precipiancy on the part
OF the civil authorities. SO much, at least, Is
admitted by General Baird, who, in des-
patch written after the occurrence OF the riot,
says:-"rhe Lieutenant-G Governor and Mayor
mad freely consulted with me, ana was so tully
convinced that IL was so strongly the intent OF
the city authorities TO preserve the peace, in
order to prevent military interference, that |
did not regard an outbreak as a thing to be
apprehended." General Sheridan does not so
fully acuuit the authorities OF blame in regard
to this aspect OF the affair. IL must be remem-
bered however, that he was absent from the
city at the time, while General Baird was in
frequent communication with the authorities,
almost 10 the moment OF the disturbance.
Baird's language acquits the authorities of pre-
meultated wrong; and this, we think, should be
accepted as conclusive. r.
How the not actually began is not a point so
easily asceTta'ned, nor is IL one of much import
ance compared with the general question of
responsibility, which we consider already set
tied. With armed and excited and angry men,
black and white, on all sides, 1t is not difficult
to understand how trlhing incident led to
strife and bloodshed. For that portion OF the
negroes carried pistols and the remainder clubs
and missiles, is reported by Sheridan as we'll as
by the witnesses examined before the Grand
jury. The latter charge upon negroes the first
blow, as well in conflict with private citizen
as in resisting the authority of The police.
sheridan speaks more dubiously. Thus, touch
ing the procession:-'A shot was fred, by
whom am not able to state but believe il to
have been by policeman or some Colored man
in the procession; this led TO other shots and a
rush after the procession Again, at the
Mechanics lnstitute:-"A row occurred be-
tween policeman and one OF the colored men,
ties" By whom matters little, seeing that
according to Sheridan both sides had now
become so excited that their relative violence
could not be readily distinguished.
1t is plain, however, that in the subsequent
scenes the police were guilty of eXcesses that
admit of no palliation. They shot down per-
sons whom they might have quietly arrested,
and they behaved most cruelty to prisoners when
noDfS 1oCn otnIo
written Immediately after his return from Texas,
and without the adv antage OF actual knowledge,
employ very strong words upon this point. ut
was murder" he wrote on the first of August.
1T was an absolute massacre by the police"
he wrote on the second. But on the 6th when pre-
pairing more circumstantial statement in reply
to the Presidents inquiries, the Generals iudg-
ment centres IN the remark-"As to the mercl-
less manner in which the Convention was
broken up, feel obliged to express strong re-
pugnance." Indeed, the entire despatch of the
date last referred to does not differ in its
essentials from the details received from other
sources.
Mayor Monroe receives no favor at the hands
OF Sheridan, who imputes 70 him large degree
OF blame for the deplorable occurrences. He
employed '"Thugs" as policemen, 1t is alleged,
and is characterized as 'bad man." whose re-
moval from Oficeis desirable. Let usnot forget,
however, that Hahn and other leading men of
the Convention are also set down by the General
as 'bad men," and that Governor Wells is
represented by him as "vacillating,n as having
shown very little of the man. and SO CON
Quoted himself throughout that if he ''could be
changed also it would not be amiss." Practi-
cally these sayings of the commanding officer
amount to little. The power to change Mayor
or Governor ceased when the absolute restora-
ton of civil authority throughout the Union
was proclaimed, and we should regret 10 see it
again resumed. The law and local opinion must
now be left TO do their work.
Ard how stands President Johnson in rela-
ton to the affair He has been assailed as,
IN fact, murderer, who connived with Louisi-
ana officials to crush and destroy loyal men.
Does the evidence now in complete form before
the public sustain or disprove the allegation
We are content TO leave the answer to any
candid reader of the published dispatches.
From first to last the President took pains to
uphold the law and preserve the peace. Before
the riot he assured the civil authorities of the
cooperation of the military in support of the
law. After the riot he did all that was possible
10 strengthen the hands of Baird and Sheridan,
approving of the declaration of martial law by
the former, and vesting in the latter "a full
authority tor the maintenance of the public
peace and safety" What the President did
was in the strict performance of duty; and if
more was not done, it was because more was
not needed to allay the local excitement and
re-establish the ordinary authority known to the
law.