New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1866-07-23
MAYOR MONROE.

When the close Of hostilidcs permitted the
Confederate soldiers whohad represented New
Orleans in the army to return home, and with
them the large number of persons who had
left the city after its capture by the federal
forces, great and natural change took place
in the character of this community. 1t be-
came again what it had not been for three
years, Southern city-Southern in its IDEAS
its aspirations, its memories and its sympa-
tbies, Was there anything strange in this
transformation Clearly not. On the con-
trary, it was natural and inevitable. Did that
fact imply " disloyalty," in any decent and
Ineligible sense of the term? Most certainly
not, unless the fact Of having fought for the
Southern cause, suffered for it, and surren-
dered it only when hope of its success had
vanished, implies continual and ineradicable
" disloyalty" Such an Interpretation would
involve the whole people of the South in the
charge, and would stigmatize them as neces-
sarily faithless to their promises and engage
ments. But if 'tloyalty" means here what it
means in every other enlightened country
simply the honorable intention to obey the
laws, and to refrain from hostilities against
the government, then the people of New Or,
leans are just as "loyal as the people of
Boston or Philadelphia
Was it strange that when the people of this
city had an opportunity to choose their local
officers they elected for their mayor, as all
other Southern citizens did, man who had
been identified with their cause, and who had
always possessed their confidence? Not at
all. 1t would have been absurd to expect any
thing else. Had they chosen any other sort
of person they would have been guilty of both
hypocrisy and ingratitude Far better a mill
tary government at once.
was it strange that when Mi Monroe Be-
came mayor Of the city he appointed his Off
GERS from among his friends and not from
among his enemies-that he constituted the
police mainly of those who were, in fact,
portion Of the real people of New Orleans, and
not Of those who, having always been opposed
to the sentiment of this community both in
peace and in war, cannot decently claim to re-
present it? Was itstrange that his appointees
were chiefly members of that National Demo
cratic party by which he was nominated and
elected? Was it wonderful that among them
were many Of those men with manned limbs or
| empty sleeves, who have right to ask service
at the hands Of community by which they
were sent forth to fight and bleed and suffer {?
BY no means. Had Mr.. Monroe acted other
wise than as he did, he would have been guilty
| of treachery towards the party which elected
him, of ingratitude towards the friends who
! supported him, and Of faithlessness towards
the people who had just bestowed on him so
conspicuous mark of their confidence. Had
he neglected the claims of those destitute but
deserving men, he would have merited the
contempt ofeyery generous mind from the Pen
obscot to the Rio Grande. Those who recon-
mend another course show that they are in
capable of approaching even that timid hon
esty which is said to be the best policy.
Rightly considered loyalty" is truth. The
man who acts falsehood is sure to ALLEVIATE
his friends, while he rarely succeeds in deceiv-
ing his enemies.
In this connection it is not superhuous to
state that merit and fitness on the part of the
applicants have been the qualifications first
required by the mayorin organizing the police.
In appointing so large number, he may
have, and perhaps, necessarily has, made some
mistakes but these are by no means charge
able to any political influences. 1t is notori
GUS that the best portion of our able-bodied
citizens took service in the Confederate army.
This fact and the additional circumstance that
about twenty thousand men were contributed
by New Orleans to the Confederate cause, |
would sufficiently explain the preponderanee
Of that element in the construction of the new
city government, both in its Legislative and its
executive departments
Was it strange that when Mr.. Monroe re- |
ceived from Mrs Mumford an application for
relief, he should have referred the memorial
to the city council2 Was it strange that he
exhibited sympathy in behalf of the widow of
a man who fell victim to that rernorseless
and vindictiYe despot who had SO LONG on
pressed the people of New Orleans? Not at
all. The case of Mrs. Mumford is entirely of
its own kind. Relief extended to her wonId
be only proper protest against that shocking
Of the laws of war, of humanity and
of nations, which consigned her husband
to the gallows, Who viii dare to saw that TO
stigmatize that act as it deserves, is a proof of
g disloyalty" towards the federal government?
Who will venture to cast aspersions on the
people of New Orleans for thinking and saying
precisely what has been thought and said by
the people Of the whole civilized world-in
New York and in Boston, as well as in London
and Paris? If "loyalty" requires the people
Of the South to declare that Turchin and
Mcneil were estimable philanthropists, and
that Butler was a high-minded and benevolent
patriot, then it were better to expunge the
word "loyalty" from our vocabulary.
President johnson and General Sheridan
both know that MIR. Monroe has, since he re-
newed his allegiance to the United States
fulfilled the obligations which his
reconciliation with the government imposed
IN him. The same rigid discharge of all the
luties of the citizen will be exacted by him
rom all of his employees This is all that the
government asks-it is all that the military
ashland when we make this state
nent we stand upon indispmqJle authoritg-
We say exactly aohat zoe ltaolo.
Any effort therefore to prejudice the Presi-
Gt1+p or |