The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1869-02-27
ABOLITION OF STATES.

OoA1euefauOn OF co-eQual states, each reserv
ing to itself the indefeasible principle of sove
reienty. These were the alternatives from
the foundation of the Union, and whether on,
or the other would establish itself as his
torical fact was q problem that vibrated in tn,
balance until the triumph of the principle O
coercion in the late struggle gave the blow Il
State rights under which they are now Ian
gushing. That they viii ever recover from
this prostration is question which seems Sc
foreign TO the actual condition of things as to
lie beyond the sphere of contemporary poll.
tics. Evading present solution in the laby-
rinths of remote and speculative possibilities,
the discussion of it in the spirit Of advocacy
would be almost as idle as to talk about the
temperance of the Dodo among birds, and
OF the Mammoth among beasts. History re-.
cords no instance of the exact res
toration of a subverted or disloca-
ted political arrangement. Perhaps the
time is not far of when the idea of
reviving suppressed Statehood in this coun-
try viii look as preposterous as the idea of
reviving the English Heptarchy would have
looked at the consummation of the Norman
Union at this moment nothing of State au-
tonomy, such as was reserved under the fed
eral Constitution, is left except the barren
forms. But in one sense-and here the
present mischief lies-these forms are MT
barren. They furnish the argument and
the machinery of the most detestable species
of local despotism. Take this State, or this
skeleton, ghost or shadow Of State. for
example. An Inscriptions set of men, far
below the dignity Of political faction.
foisted into power by fraud and force, only
study how they may exercise the functions of
a nominal State organization to defeat the will
and plumber the substance of the people of
the State. 1t is plain from the tenor
OF all that these pretended State authorities
have done or attempted to do, that it will be
in spite of their efforts if the people of Lou
isiana shall hereafter enjoy the substantial
benefits of liberty under State government.
or fair measure Of protection against local |
tyranny under the central government. Il
may well be asked, in presence Of such state
OF facts, what interest the people have in the
continuance of the forms, without the reali-
ties, OF State autonomy? It is not in this
quarter alone that this question has been
by events and circumstances. View
ng the nonentity of State rights in about half
ne country, and the steady approach towards
heir annlhiiation in the other half. ye6ectino
persons everywhere begin to see the mischiey.
JUS aosurdity OF clinging to hollow TECHNICAL
les Of federatiye Union from which the
,enius Of federation has fed One of these
echnicalities is the system Of electoral cole |
'es for the choice Of President In the DESIGN
# the trainers Of the federal Constitution the
lectors, appointed by the States independ-
nty OF each other, were to choose the Presi-
ent' each college acting Independently Of all
be others and without reference TO the
opular voice as previously manifested. /;
ut, IN practice, the colleges have stead +
lstly aimed to do nothing more, to use the
ords OF MIR. Chas. F. Adams in a paper read
siore the social science convention, ethan =
gister the popular decision previously ar =
we'd at, and this they do not do correctly. >
OF only do they not register the popular yer. q
ct, but they hold out inducement to cor .
ption and opportunity to fraud, and threaten ;,
Al
ndidate in the recent election received a a,
ajoIity Of FIVE per cent. in the popular vote =
the colleges he received majority of FORTY -
III per cent. A change of less than 80. 600
ties IN seven States in the recent election
'uld have made Gov. Seymour the legally W
,cted President, while his opponent would in
II have received popular majority of 28O.- al
votes. This and many other exemplifica- al
ms show that under the existing system a h,
smium is placed upon fraud in certain local. til
IS where a few votes may outbalance a IL
,at man in another locality" pa
The peculiarly easy and tempting premium ga
On fraud of this nature under the auspices ha
spurious State governments in the South tel
10 more to be questioned than the determi- ye
ion OF the men who control these govern. lie
hts to win it. Their rule is to construe ar
heir own favor all elections which involve lie
practical result; to count an adverse ma
ty where nothing depends on It, but to
ct 1t At somsthine doss depand ON il and OBJ
9pt In It's stead the voice of the minority. CT,
Adams remarks that sit may become a abb
Gus question whether the United States old
not be obliged ultimately to take the wa
lie management of national elections into chs
hands of national officers" if all discrim- his
ion in the experience of the elective fran
e On account Of race, color, nativity. =,
'erty education or creed is to be .'ii
pit sway-that is to say, if Sag Wy
Cells, Teutons, Latins, Sclaves Nv
,oes, Indians, Chinese, Hindoos. MS
stians, Jews, Mahomedans, Brahmists. "N
dhists, Josh worshipers, fetish worship- "
capitalists, proletarians, thrifty artisans ''n
leprous lazzaroni, are all to stand -
the same footing in the catalogue of
rican voters and sovereigns. tits a stil 'U'e
serious question whether it would not r.
etter to complete the work of national =,
talization at once by merging State cleo ~ ~
into national, and so wiping out those .NI
and fostering blotches which now bear '-'o-
anne OF State governments in the South. s'a1