The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1870-05-25
The Democrat and The N. 0. Times.
We take the following from the
New Orleans Times of the 18th

inst:
Two of our contemporaries, the Re-
publican and the Bulletin, after divi-
ding doubtful honors and emolnments
as Joint official journals of this city,
have given renewed evidence OF the
inscriptions partisan spirit which
governs them, by publishing and GOV:
ertly endorsing a maliciously false and
libellous extract from the Alexandria
Ha.) Democrat, which declares that
this paper, the New Orleans Times,
screw up under Banks, the robber
of the men, aud Butler. the insnlter of
the women of Louisiana; that it has
the same editor now as then and that,
even though the establishment has
'roped in" the oldest Democratic edi-
tor in the State" it can offer no sat
isfactory reason why the Democrats
should sell out the party to Warmoth,
the Slaughterhouse Company, and
other robbers of the people OF Lou
isiana."
In reply, it is only nece ssary to state
that the Times was not started till
long after Butler had hidden alden
to Louisiana. 1t was ushered into ex-
istence by Thomas P. May, native of
this city, after Jacob Barker's Natl nal
Advocate was suppressed because of
the publication of an article written by.
the present editor of the Times, in re-
ply to an attack made on the women
of Louisiana in Banks organ. the Era
The present editor of the Times, we
may furthermore say, came into the
Office in April, 1864. when the late aud
lamented Mr.. King assumed control,
and since that date no paper in the
State has more consistently opposed
the "robbers of the people of Lou
isiana." no matter under what partisan
guise thslr robberies were conducted.
And now, because We favor legitimate
uprising of the people against the
political robbers who have SO grie, Ons-
~ oppressed them, "the little dogs and
all. Tray, Blanche and Sweetheart" of
both political parties, are barking at
our heels. Lat them bark, say we:
the people, whom we serve, understand
their motives, and know how to pun
ish their hetrayers. They will have a
Peoples Party, no matter how serious
ly it may interfere with the schemes of
plundering politicians. si.3' 'p
As the editor of the Times was
present, while we were engaged in
other business, we are disposed to
admit that he is more familiar than
we with the dates. Of the accession
and departure of each tyrant who
happened to be entrusted with the
task of expressing the men and
women Of Louisiana. But the
point which we attempted to make
in the little squib quoted by the
Times still remains uncontrovelted
because it is uncontrovertible. The
point is that the Times, which now
affects to dictate the course Of the
Democratlcparty, had it's birth and
grew into, gigantic proportions un-
der a government which was op-
posed to the Democratic party and
to the interests of the people of
Louisiana. This the Times virtual
~ admits in the article quoted
above. When the lines were open
ed the people of Louisiana found
the Times in existence, enjoying
such patronage as had seldom
been accorded to a paper in New
Orleans, and in the highest degree
of prosperity, while its contemp-
oraries had either been suppressed
or we're dragging out precarious
existence under the censorship of
the military authorities. AS no
paper had ever called in question
any tyranical military act without
being suppressed, the natural in
ference of the people was that the
Times had grown fat by bringing
to the military commanders and
voluntarily doing their dirty work.
Whether that commander was But
Ter or Banks made little difference
to them, as indeed there was little
difference between the two men.
We said that the Times had the
same editor now as then. The
Times admits that it's present edi-
tor was it's editor for more than
a year previous to the surrender. 1t
is true that the ostensible RESPONSE
BILE editor was the '.lamented Mr.
King" but everybody knows that
the "lamented" could not have
written three consecutive English
sentences to make sense if it had
secured his salvation. The "pres-
emit editor" says that the Advocate
was suppressed because of one Of
his severe anonymous articles,
leaving the inference that when he
got into the Times he wrote arti-
Giles more to the liking Of the au-
thorities. This is what we had sup
posed. Even supposing that his
splendid effort to protect the wo-
men of Louisiana from insult is not
opocryphal, the people of Louis
lana have discovered that his ex-