New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-05-16
DEMOCRATIC INCONSISTENCY.

{ press throughout the country against wha
is known as the Enforcement" or ''Ku
Klux' law is effecting good where harm
only was intended. tits showing up the in
consistency and deceitfulness of the Dem
ocratic party in denouncing as unconsti
tutional the law recently passed by Con
greSs for the protection and enforcement
of the rights and privileges of American
citizens in every section of our country
In 1850 law was passed by Democratic
Congress, securing the rights and privil,
eges of slave owners. The law was known
as the Fugitive Slave Law" 1t conferred
extraordinary powers upon the general
government for the arrest Of human beings
who had absconded from slavery, and
found an asylum in the free States of the
American Union. 1t is well known that
in many of those States the people gave
protection to persons fleeing from slavery,
and it was found impossible for State au-
thorities, prior to the passage of the fugi-
tive slave law, to return fugitive slaves to
their masters, even where the authorities
were disposed to do it.
This law was passed by Democratic
Congress for the purpose of investing a
Democratic President with power to en-
force the rights of slave owners That
law was extraordinary in its scope and
character and most obnoxious to the peo-
| pie of the free States in which it was
to be enforced, if necessary, by the use of
the army and navy of the United States
1t was no crime under a Democratic adj
ministration to march the federal troops
into free State for the purpose of arrest
ing human being who had sought refuge
there. That was not violation of State
rights under Democratic administration,
although at the present time and under a
Republican administration, the Demo-
cratic party tell the people it is a gross
violation of the constitution and the rights
of States to send federal troops into States
for the purpose of enforcing the constitu-
tional rights of all their citizens. The
constitutionalty of the fugitive slave
law was never questioned by the |
Democratic party. Under the operation
of the previous question it was forced |
through the House of Representatives by
the Democratic majority that existed in
1850, and its constitutionality maintained |
by the party as long as it remained in
power, and repeatedly affirmed by United |
States courts presided over by Demo-
cratic judges. The first section of this |
extraordinary law, made by the Demo-
cratic party in the interest of slavery, pro-
vides for the appointment of commission
ers by the United States circuit courts,
to execute its provisions. The third Sec
ton provides that the number shall be ex-
tended at the discretion of the court, and
any number appointed that may be
considered necessary. The fourth con-
fers the following uncommon powers:
And be it further enacted. That the com
mlsslOners above named shall have concur
rent jurisdiction with the judges of the cir
cult and district courts of the United States
N their respective circuits and districts
within the several States. and the Judges of
he superior courts of the Territories, sew
,rally and collectively, in term time and
vacation, and shall grant certificates to such
claimants upon satisfactory proof being
made, with authority ITO take and remove
such fugitives from service or labor to the
state or Territory from which such person
nay have escaped or fed.
The law also prescribes the duties of
United States marshals, who are author
zed to swear in any number of deputies,
nd, in case Of necessity, may summon
oSse c0mitatus-the power of the county
nd in case that proved insufficient, could
all upon the United Statas forces-the
rmy and navy-to assist in enforcing
ersons back into slavery. This was the
of the fugitive slave law, a law {
nat empowered an unlimited number of
'nited States marshals to use the army 1
nd navy of the United States to enforce c
eaocratic laws, repugnant to the peo- {
les idea of freedom and justice The
overs conferred by this law, under a L
emocratic administration, were not a
fought destructive of the peoples rights Il
: of the rights of States. But the enact
ent ola law, by Republican Congress, q
n the enforcement of equal civil and polit- Il
al rights among the people of this coun- t
y, with authority vested in the President "
stead of number of irresponsible mar n
lals, to use the army and navy, if neces- II
ry, for the enforcement of those rights, Il
rs been pronounced by the Democratic n
lrty unconstitutional, destructive of W
ates rights, and dangerous to the liber-
IS of the people.
The Democratic party, when in power,
d not hesitate to send United States u
oops into Massachusetts, against the l.
shes Of that State, to assist in the in
nous work of forcing a human being al
ok into slavery. Anthony Burns was n
lie Of the victims of the Democratic
W made in the interest of slavery, and u
stained by the Legislative, judicial and n
ecutive branches of the government, 81
cked by the army and navy This was az
constitutional and right under a Dem tt
ratio administration; but when a similar P
W is passed in the interest Of freedom, c.
Id Republican President is invested c.
It'll the power to enforce it against those W
no by force and violence seek to deprive u