Raftsman's journal. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1854-1948, 1866-08-08

John Ray, John E. King and other dele
gates decline going.
From the Philadelphia Inquirer.
History of the Trouble.
To the majority of our citizens, who it is
to be presumed, pay but little attention to
the politics of the State of Louisiana, the
recent riots In the city OF New Orleans
seems inexplicable, further than that they
public feeling. Passion must have had
much to do with those melancholy events,
but there are mixed up with them political
considerations which render the subject of
the contest one.of considerable Importance.
The riot took place among the opponents
and the advocates of the re-assembling ot
the State Convention of 1864. That body
was originally convened under the auspices
of General Banks, and it was composed of
loyal men, elected by white voters from the
few districts in the State, in the neighbor
hood of the Mississippi river, which were
under Federal control. The Convention
assembled, deliberated and formed a State
Constitution, under which there was an
election for Governor which resulted in the
choice of Michael Hahn. The latter was
afterwards elected Senator to represent
Louisiana in the United States Congress,
and he resigned his Gubernatorial office in
the anticipation that he would be admitted
to his seat, in which idea events proved
that he was mistaken. He was succeeded
in the Governorship by j. Madison Wells,
who still holds that office. The Conven-
ton, although loyal, was quite liberal to the
Rebels who were at that time in the South
ern army. 1t made no provision which
would disfranchise the blacks. The conse-
quence has been that since the close of the
war the paroled soldiers who were in the
Rebel armies have returned to Louisiana,
and are disposed to assert that they are as
good citizens as they ever were. Although
they all uphold it, and are, in defense of the
instrument, strictly conservative. When
the Convention had concluded its labors it
did not adjourn sine die. A resolution was
passed to the effect that it might be called
together by requisition from the President.
The latter power had not been attempted to
be exercised until now 1t is obvious that
the men who originally held the Convention
find that they made mistake. They should
have settled all the terms upon which the
absent Secessionists could be admitted to
their forfeited rights of citizenship while
they had authority to do so. The attempt
to call the Convention together now is, of
course, calculated to arouse bitter opposi-
tion and the result is shown in the late dis
orders. Previous to the meeting, Judge,
acting under the authority of the Constitu-
ton of 1864 and protesting to be obedient
to it, charged the members of the Grand
Jury of New Orleans, pointedly upon their
duty to prevent unlawful assemblies, - in
ferring that the Convention would be such,
and certainly intending to prejudice mems
minds against it. There may be great doubt
whether a sovereign convention Of the peo-
pie of a State, which it is universally agreed
had authority to act, could, upon rcassem-
bling, by virtue of power asserted when
it was in session, be correctly called AN un-
lawful assembly, There may be great OBJ.
jections to a convention constituting itself a
permanent body, but they may be tested, if
necessary, by law. A sovereign convention
can certainly adjourn to meet again or to be
assembled together when called by the pre-
siding officers There is an objection in this
case that the President of the Convention
did not call it together. The act was done
by member who was elected President
pro tenn. at caucus of the members. His
right to issue the call might be contested,
but new trouble arises in consideration of
the question, in consequence of the recogni-
ton of Governor Wells of the summons, and
the issuing of writs to fill up vacancies by
election. lf the Convention assemblies, it
oOo.io W Say WHAT III tIldv legally no.
1t had framed a Constitution which was
submitted to the people and ratified, in
which was provision usual in many State
Constitutions, to the effect, that proposed
amendments to the instrument should be
agreed to by the Legislature and submitted
to vote of the people, when, if ratified, it
would become part of the Constitution.
Its claimed by the opponents of the Conven-
ton that hereby it has parted with all its
power. On the other hand, the members
of that body assume that they represent the
people in their sovereign capacity, and have
full right not only to amend the Constitu-
ton altogether, but to set it aside 1t is
said further, that this Convention will at
tempt to ratify the Reconstruction amend
ment to the Constitution of the United
States, matter only to be done by State
Legislatures. The controversy, therefore,
involves some very interesting and import.
ant questions, and the outbreak consequent
upon the reassembling of the body adds to
the profound impression which must be
produced upon many minds, by the extra
nrdI IyT,ef foy IL ~ I.