The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1868-07-15
ONE NOPE TRIAL,


power, in spite of either constitutional i'm
pediment or popular reprobation. Nor is it
wise to forget that thus far, not one of their
devices in that behalf-not the most auda-
cious, revolutionary and fagitious of those de-
vices-has been decisively and effectually re-
pudiated by the Northern people, by whose
votes this party originally came into power.
And ii is at this moment eminently the part
of prudent and practical sagacity to look
clearly and frankly at the actual relations in
which the ten States which have been sub
Jected to congressional reconstruction now
stand 70 the federal government, and to the
popular will of the North, active or passive,
which is behind it. Are we not, as a matter
of fact, in subsection, though under different
forms, to that government and that will, not
less in 1868 than we were in 1865, when the
war of the preceding four years ended in our
subjugation to superior numbers and re-
sources? Analyze our actual situation, and
does it not come to this, hope as we may,
strive as we may, to bring it into conformity
hereafter with the constitutional theory
of Union of eo-equal States
Strange and sad it may seem
in the face Of our nominal restoration to all
the rights, functions and relations of State
in the Union, We are not permitted by the
realities of our case to answer, without grave
reservation, the above questions in the mega
tive. We are forced, on the contrary, to adj
NIT that whether we shall arrive in six months
in twelve MONTHS or in four years, at the
position of fully restored Statehood in the
Union and under the Constitution, hangs
upon the issue of a yet unresolved prob
lem. And of this problem the most potent
indeed the determining element is the will of
the Northern people acting through, or react
ing upon, the federal government. While
the policy of the radical party and Congress,
which is now the policy of that government,
PREVAILS policy which imposes an I'M
changeable State Constitution upon our peo-
pie, and, while declaring that it is right and
proper that the Northern States should regu-
late suffrage within their limits, insists that
suffrage in Louisiana and other Southern
States shall be subject to regulation by Con-
gress-the restoration of our Statehood on a
basis of equality under the federal Constitu-
ton, is of course out of tie question.
Where, then, must we look for State
restoration in fact as well as in form? We
must look for it IN those States whose vitality
has not yet withered under the deadly sweep
of central power. Congress does not yet
dare to assume supreme control over the
reception or rejection of electoral votes from
the North but this control it has assumed,
by the Edmunds bill, with regard to the cleo
toral votes from the South. 1t follows, there
fore, that We can expect the election of no
other than the radical candidate for President
to be ratified by Congress, unless the oppos-
ing candidate is supported by a majority in
the North sufficient to decide the election,
whether the Southern vote be counted or not
counted.
But suppose that this decisive majority from
the North Is wanting and suppose that Con-
gress rejects certain votes from the South
which, added to that majority, would decide
The election-what then? The National Intel
ligencer, in recent article, propounds this
question, but fails to announce a definite
policy for the supposed juncture. "wiIl, or
ought the conservatives" says the Intelligent |
Ger, " thus seen to be entitled under the Con- |
stitution to administer the government, sub |
NIT to the fraud and allow the radicals, against
the Constitution, thus to usurp and hold il? |
In other words, shall the majority constitu-
tionally entitled to govern, allow themselves
to be governed unconstitutionally by minor
ity 2" The same journal also remarks:
1t is patent that the votes of the Southern States
are being, and to be, so dealt with as to fashion
them to radical ends and will only be SO far ad-
mitted, if admitted at ALL to be cast in the presi.
dental election as they may be calculated on for |
the radical nominee. Is it not, then, the plain |
duty Of the opposite party thus schemed against,
to consider the course II would be prOperfOr them |
to pursue, if, through the fraudulent Vaccinations
of their adversaries they should suffer an apparent
but an unfair and unreal defeat!
1t rests with the Northern people whether a
decisive majority shall be given which will
defy congressional manipulation of the cleo
toral returns of the South, or whether ade-
quate steps shall be taken to defeat a fraud
which will cancel their own votes along with
rejected Southern votes, and give the presi-
lency, not to the choice of the whole people,
but to the creature of Congress. If they
IRE wanting, IN either particular, from
hat moment we should have to renounce, as
IN improbable speculation, as q disastrous
ielusion, the theory of a constitutional union
If co-equal States; and, if compelled to be
inder a central despotism, we ought
It least to do what we could to tighten our
7oke by making it an equal despotism for
North and South alike. One more trial for
State rights and constitutional liberty! If
hat fail, then it would plainly behoove us to
compensate for the loss as far as possible by
exercising spirit of wise and just selfish
less, and obtaining all the benefits attainable
Inder despotic power.
LETTER FROM THAD. STEvENs.-The following
etter from Thad. Stevens was addressed 10 DR..
henry Carpenter, of Lancaster, Penn: