New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1866-03-09
FRIDAY MORNING, MARCH 9, 1866.


AV MOD NTNn MADrH q
= ~ y. ~ ~ : - p ~ -. '>'>-'-1N
speeches, letters and conversations OF Presiaent
johnson, Mr.. Seward, and all other conservative
men at the North; either in or out OF Congress- ne
would have had the solution OF his question. Az
tiiat class Of public men held that the states hao
not lost their identity BY the revolution.
There were many grave reasons for calling a
convention. The Convention OF 1854 was not ana
could not be received as an exponent OF the VIII
of the people of Louisiana. The action OF this
legislature did not arm or give validity 10 1heir
work 1t was necessary the people OF the state
should authoritativey re-asaert their relations with
the Federal government. II was not hoped by
calling Convention to place ourselves in a more
favorable attitude to the radicals at the North but
to reorganize our own internal affairs. The nun-
Der Of representatives arbitrarily granted to New
Orleans should be reduced TO q Just proportion.
This was an suspicious time for the reform. II not
obtained now ne believed New Orleans would
never yield that supremacy The country should
take advantage Of good temper and equity Of the
present new orleans deiegauon- Inc salaries OF
State officers should be redueed. We were pay
ing ls6o,ooV year more tnan ought to pc PAID,
and ne saw no reason why LOUISIANA should pay
her ofhcers higher salaries than other States. his
objections to the CONSTITUTION OF 1854 did not
spring from the time 1t was made, 1874 or 1864 but
from us radical VICES ana deleces. we neeoed
Constitution that would allow development of
our resources by works OF internal Improvement
| and we needed to guard ourselves from the inter-
ference OF the Federal Congress- During the war
| there had been two conaioting State governments
! The disputes as the rights people had acquired
| under these governments mad tobe adjusted or
endless litigation would result. M lawyer could
now tell his clients under what laws they were
living 3aaHs s&tE SEA- aettIGgaas %f 3-H@G
/ Mr.. Gates was opposed to the convention pro-
ject at the beginning and was still opposed to 1t.
He did not admit the radical proposition tnat
Louisiana had ceased TO pc q state, but In view
of the complicated conditlon OF our relations with
the Federal government, the delicate ground on
which we stood, ne deemed IT duty 10 RESIST an
agitation OF constitutional rights Or provisions at
this jnncture He denied having ever Pfedged
himself for q convention. me question was not
discussed in his parish at the Time Of the eiecton,
nor even in the parish OF the gentleman from st.
Mary. The absorbing question at the election
was stay law. convention was not mentioned.
Ifhis, Mr.. Gas, vote was TO disgrace him. ne was
| willing to take the disgrace he was prepared TO
stand 1T; but believing ne was Eight, although ne
knew he was in the minority, knew the bill would
be passed, he would vote according to his conYlc.
j tions. aEgao 81. gE igtgLa G.l4 n y }-l4
Mr.. Walker, as member OF the Committee Of
Fifteen, was convinced during the extra session
this measure was lnexpedient and his convictions
now were the same. The Legislature acted under
the Constitution OF 1861, ana came Aogether to dt