Daily Ohio statesman. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1855-1870, 1867-02-18
Gblo $tatesrrart.
THE new ORLEANS RIOT /!

The COngressiOna q l nvestigatiOn-Re.
port of the Minority of the Com
mIttee--The Riot a Mere Local Dis
Gurbance, Provoked by Ihe COnVen-
tionists-KepOTt of Representative
BOyer.ltl -rJLl-L Ll..t l....4..f, .ai
Representative D. M. Boyer, of Pennsyl-
vania, who dissents from the conclusions OF
his colleagues on the New Orleans Riot
Investigation committee, says the avowed
object of the Convention was an amend-
ment of the existing Constitution of Louis
lana in such manner as to secure to their
party the absolute control of the offices in
the State, negro suffrage, and the dis
franchisement of sufficient number of
those who had been connected with the re-
belIion. These were the leading measures
by which the desired ascendency was to be
attained.
Mr.. Boyer proceeds to show the illegality
of the Convention, saying the government
which was in force In Louisiana under the
Constitution of 1864 was, on the 30th of
July, 1866, even from the Radical stand
point, by that acquiescence and the consent
of Congress, a State de jure rs well as a
Government de fdcto, and binding as such
upon all persons within its Jurisdiction.
The Conventionists counted upon Con-
gre ssional cooperation. Under ordinary
circumstances, small body of men assem-
bling for the purpose of changing the gov
ernment of State with so little color of
law might be treated as harmless body,
and be regarded as entitled to but little
public notice. But in this case the times
and circumstances we're extraordinary, and
we'll calculated to excite serious apprehen-
sion. A Judge of the Supreme Court was
at the head, and the Governor of the State
4, - sriu haf
gress had been consulted, and would lend
its assistance. Preceding the action of the
Convention Judge Howell proceeded to
Washington to consult in person with the
leading members of Congress. He in
formed the committee that he consulted
with members of Congress, and named
Hon. Messrs. Boutwell,, Stevens, Kelley,
Banks. Grinnell, Morris, Paine and others.
The result was that he returned to New
Orleans and went on with the movement.
The encouragement which Howell testifies
he received at Washington was made
known to the friends of the Convention,
perhaps with exaggeration; and on the 24th
of July, six days before the meeting, tele-
gram was sent from New Orleans to the
Washington correspondent OF the Nep
York Times, stating, among other things,
that Howell had returned with assurances
tion, &c. The Endorsement and support of
Congress appears to have been the common
topic of conversation among the Conven-
tionists before the 30th of July.
Mr.. Boyer, in reviewing the origin of the
riots, said the Conventionists appealed to
the negroes to arouse them, and their act =
i've cooperation was invited. 1t will be
remembered, he says, that these demon
strations were made In the heart of the city;
yet the speakers were not interrupted, nor
the meeting disturbed. After the ha-
rangues we're over, a procession OF between
two and three thousand cOlored persons,
between 10 and IL O'clock at night appear
ed with toreh-lights, hurrahing and shout
ing through several of the principal streets
to the city hall. There the crowd was ad-
dressed by DIR. Dostie, and eXhorted to go
home peaceably, but to kill any who might
assail them. After this, no disturbance
took place, and the crowd peaceably dis
persed. Yet no soldiers were engaged, and
no policemen cared to interfere. May not,
he asks. these acts be cited as striking evil
dence of the toleration of free speech in the
city of New Orleans at that date? The
cause of the riot might be sought for else
where. 1t was the acts and the declared
intention of the Conventionists, and the il
legal and violent character of their pro-
ceedings, which produced the eXciteme mt
and brought about the collision. The char
acter and antecedents of the COnventiOnists
were not such as to make them the accept
ed standards of unionism and loyalty in
that locality. The prescription threatened
by such men, through the action of the
Convention, must have been peculiarly gall
ing to those to be affected by their proceed
ings. .uf le.r
1t had already been shown that no inter-
ference was made with free speech !; but in
cendiary appeals and acts of revolution
could not be pursued with impunity, and
arrests might properly and lawfully be
made to arrest the progress of such affairs.
Mr.. Boyer does not agree with the major
ity that the riot was deliberately planned
BY Mayor Monroe, and refers to the evil
dence to show that the first shots were fired
by a negro at a policeman. To Lieut.. Gov.
Voorhies, ex-rebel, belongs the credit of
having supplied the place of his official SUI
perior in originating timely precautionary
measures, which, If carried out, would have
prevented the riot, and which failed from
no fault of his. In reviewing the comments
of the majority of the committee on the
course of the President, Mr.. Boyer says the
President needed no vindication; if itwere
not on account of the partisan ISLANDERS
assailed during the late election, it might
be justly deemed an offense against good
taste to name him in this connection. His
acts, so far as they had any bearing upon
the circumstances investigated by the COM
mittee, exhibited him In no other light
than as chiet magistrate actuated by q
sincere desire to preserve the public peace
and to uphold the law. Mr.. Boyer contro-
verts the views. of the majority that the
riot is to be attributed to those who are
charged with hostility to the Union, and
as prescribing those from business who are
loyal to the country. IlEE XIII
Mr.. Boyer submits the following conclu-
si0ns. aa%& hg9ma CI-Tt5 .
/ 1. That the riot of the 18th of July, was
local disturbance, originating In local cir
cumstances of great provocation, and in no
wise the result of any hostility or disaffec-
tion on the part of the community Of New
Orleans toward the Federal Government.
II was not i'm any just or fair sense of the
term vestige or outcrop of the rebellion,
nor can 1t be said to be any indication, even
in.the remotest degree, of disposition on
the part of the people of the city of New
Orleans or of the State of Louisiana to re-
new hostilities in any form with the estab-
lished authorities, either State or Federal.
2. 1t would be a monstrous injustice to
hold the whole people of the State of Louisi-
ana accountable for the acts of those en-
gagged In riot confined TO asmall portion
Of the city of New Orleans; and for that
cause to abrogate, by act of Congress, the
civil government of that State, now in
peaceful and successful operation, would.
be usurpation of power not warranted by
the Constitution, and gross outrage upon
the principles OF free government.
8. The riot was provoked by the incenr