The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1868-06-09
GENERAL GRANTS D1sPArsH.

The dispatch of General Grant to General
Buchanan is very suggestive of that kind of
arrogant impertinence which has manifested
itself in his conduct ever since he became the
tool of the Republican party in order that he
might become its master. He acts now as if
he were already not only President but die
tator of the United States, and as if be pos
sessed theright, as well as the power, to make
and to promulgate laws. The question in
volved in the controversy with General
Buchanan, provoked by the conventional COM
mittee, is purely legal question, arising out
of the application of the reconstruction laws
to the present situation of the State. That
question it is not within the province
of General Grant to decide, and, per-
haps, an attempt even TO decide it would
have required too intense an effort of
the Grantian intellect. 1t is stated by Wash
ington kilograms that he has come to the con-
clusion that the law does not authorize him
TO interfere in this matter, but an absence Of
authority is no obstacle to man who has
come to consider that the will of his party is
law, and that the suggestion of the General of
our Armies, like an invitation from the king,
is equivalent to command. If Mr. Packard
has been guilty of an offense cognizable by a
military commission under the law he will be
no less guilty after Congress shall have added
another patch to the tattered garment of re-
construction than he was last week or yester-
day. On that point General Grant has no
authority whatever. Its decision is vested
exclusively in the district commander. Con-
gress may admit Louisiana tomorrow, and
still Mr.. Packard viii remain guilty and liza
BILE for his guilt, if he has been guilty at all.
But still more remarkable fact than Gen.
Grants impertinent interference in a matter
beyond his jurisdiction, is the reason given
for that interference. He suggests that, in
view of the legislation pending in Congress,
proceedings against Mr. Packard be stayed.
But what right has Gen. Grant, as a military
commander, to know anything of pending
legislation What right has he to assume
that bill will become law, simply because
it embodies what he fancies to be the will of
his party? Is the country to understand that
Gen. Grant is not only the executive, TO the
exclusion of the President, but that he is pre-
pared to execute laws before they are made?
And, is Gen. Grant to be understood as claim
ing supreme judicial as well as military func-
tons within the Southern States In other
words, is Gen. Grant at once Judiciary, legis-
lative and executive? Is he an uncrowned
despot, only waiting TO be proclaimed empe-
ror by his subservient pretorians
A short time ago the New York Tribune de-
clared that when the General of our. Armies"
demanded the impeachment Of the President,
the Senate had no right to hesitate. His
opinion was proclaimed to be law. The Repub-
licsn party nominated him for the Presi-
dency; and he now swaggers with all the
insolence of anticipated power; suggests in
the tone of command; usurps authority which
was not conferred on him; and promulgates
the law of bis party, before it has been
moulded into official form by the hand of the
law maker 1t depends on the people of the
United States to determine whether this is
the beginning of the end or the end of the
beginning