The south-western. [volume] (Shreveport, La.) 1852-1870, 1868-11-04
Blair On Reconstruction.


TheLafayete, Indiana, Courier, of the l7tb publishes
the following letter from Gen. Frank P Blair to ct
zen of Lafayette:
FokT SANDERS, V WYOMING TERRITORY,
August "a, 1868.
TO James Howes, Esq, Lafayette, Indiana;
Dear Sri have received your letter, III Which you
ask If would endeavor to Rave the constitutional
ity of the reconstruction tested by the Supreme
Court before proceeding treat them null and yed
In answer say that the vital principle Of the
sructon acts has already been decided to be unconsti
tutional, null and void, by the Supreme Court, the
whole bench concurrng in the case Of Ailligan and
Bowles, which went up from the State of Indiana On
writ Of habeas corpus.
In that case it was decided in the plain language of
the Constitution that the government could not eStab
fish martial law in time of peace, try citizen by
military commits on or court martial The recon-
struction acts, cec4led stand ou martial law and
nothing else. 1t is the Of ~these acts They
prepared and put in execution in time of pro.
found peace in defiance of the unanimous decision Of
the Supreme Court to which have referred and they
and all that has been done under them, are null and
void.
A case was matte under these acts-tlle case of
McCarde Of Mssissppi--and brought before the SD
preme Court and it is well known that the court was
ready to declare these acts unconstitutional when Con-
gress passed another act to deprive the Supreme Court
oft Jurisdiction, and openly attempted to irtimidac
the judges by threats of renUdeling the court. ~
The Supreme Court in another case-that of Cum
mHgs Of Missouri-decded that the disfranchisunent
Of the white people of the Southern States by an act
Of Congress. bill of attander and all tx post fcto
law both of which were forbidden in express terms by
the Constitution. Even the Radicals admit, in their
Chicago platform, that the States aene haze the right
10 decide who . be entitled to suffrage within The
states and yet Congress has assumed 10 take the right
from tie waite people and give it to the negroes with
in tic Southern States.
The reconstruction acts violate the Constitution in
all these particulars and it has been already so decided
by the Supreme Court The Constitution says the mil
iary shall always be subordinate the civil authority
but these have superseded all civil authority and
erected military governments at the South. Do YOU
want decision Of The Supreme Court to show that this
is unconstitutional? Are those who say that the mill
rary is subordinate to the civil authority rcvoutonistS?
Are those who demand the restoration Of the trial by
jury, which las been suppressed in the South by the
reconstruction acts revUluouists2 Are these WHO
claim the benefit OF the great writ Of right the habeas
corpus which is denied 600 600 Of oar people by
the infamous reconstruction acts, to be braided as
revolgiionists -?
Shall we be called revou ionsts because We proclain.
in the very language of the Constitution that Congress
shall pass no bill OF attander post facto law or
shall we be thus branded for claiming what The Con
stitution comedies in express words that the States
shall regulate suffrage for themselves? Do we want
more decisions ct TIE Supreme Court these points
The truth is that the Radicals the real revolution
lists and have subvercd the fundamental principles of
government and converted it into Il mean and
malignant ogarchy, sure to lapse into military des-
pOtiSn.
To restore the government and the great guarantees
of freedom, contained in the Constitution, and iniler-
tied from our ancestors, is revolution" To execute
the will Of the people, whom the fragmentarv rump
Congress has put at defiance, is "revolltionn To
carry out the decisions of the Supreme Court is revo
luton" This revolution is at hand The peoples
will, the Judgment of the court of the highest arstc-
ton, will be enforced against usurpng rump Con
gress.
FRANK IS