New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-01-19


| what the President might say In his mes
| sage, for he had already declared final
| ity. He wanted the views of committee
| first.
MIR. Poland expressed doubts whether
| Congress could act even as suggested by
Mr.. Sheldon's resolution.
Mr. Sheldon referred to the case OF Rhode
| Island, where Congress had interfered.
Mr.. Poland denied that the case was
analogous. In the case of Rhode Island
there vas really two governments, while in
the case OF Louisiana it was only question
of contest between State officers. This
was, he thought, q purely judicial question.
Mr.. Hale advocated Mr.. Buffers resOlu-
ton, and argued that the country would
hold the Republican party responsible IT it
failed to take hold OF this case at once, and
to give republican form of government TO
Louisiana.
Mr.. Bingham agreed that Louisiana had
written constitution, but what Was 1t
worth if it failed to give security and
safety to the people. It. was NOT Intended
to declare what was the correct Legisla-
ture, but to see that all people we're assured
in their rights
Mr.. SootieId thought the Presidents meS-
sage should be read before taers Was fur
Their discussion.
Mr.. Blair, of Missouri, opposed General
Buffers resolution.
Mr.. Dawes had seen this debate coming
for several days, and fully expected it.
There were questions involved that might
be met without an investigation, and there
were others with which nothing could be
done without an investigation. When
cases like that of Louisiana occurred in his
country the constitution prescribed that ID
was the duty of the executive to ascertain
which was the de facto government, and
after the President has performed hIs duty
it is the duty of Congress to decide what
government shall be recognized.
But the real result, so far as State officers
are concerned, must be worked out by State
courts and State laws. Il seems mon
strous doctrine that the President by de-
cree, or Congress by enactment, can declare
who are de jure or de factO the officers OF "a
State. Congress can only gathrr around
those who are declared to be the de factO
officers of the State government.
With regard to federal officers Congress
could better interfere. On the second Tues
day of February, which was close at hand,
this question would come up, when the cleo
toral vote was counted, the House could not
escape from its consideration, and unless
provision was made beforehand there was
no tribunal to decide the question. He re-
ferred then to the scene which occurred in
the House four years ago III relation to tae
counting the vote of Georgia. He said if
not prepared beforehand we might have
scene of anarchy and confusion again in
the House. AS to State officers, he re-
peated that it was the duty of the Presi-
dent to stand by those who we're recognized
as the de facto officers, leaving it to the
courts to determine who were elected and
who ought to be State officers. If they VIC
late the facts in the case, they must render
an account to the people Of Louisiana, to
whom they are responsible.
Mr. Dawes condemned the action of Judge
Durell, but applauded the President for not
going behind the court. but sustaining lis
DEGREES.
Mr.. Farnsworth of Illinois, suggested
that there might be two sets of judges.
Whose decree would the President sustalnt
Mr. Shellabarger thou ght that before ac-
ton was taken members ought to be reason
ably clear what the duty of Congress is in
this embarrassing case 1t is competent for
the United States to give aid if the Leglsla-
ture of State demands it. Louisiana hay-
ing good courts, good constitution, good
laws and good citizens, the machinery OF
the State was not in the condition it was
when interfered with Immediately after the
war. They now had government, and he
wanted to leave the whole question with the
courts.
Mr. Eldridge, of Wisconsin, did not be-
ieve there was any case here to jus ity fed
tfal AL IlIdL SobSI tbS VI tIo
executive had to do was to inquire if Louis
lana had constitution republican in form.
He denied that the President or Attorney
General had ever had a right to interfere,
and, with Mr.. Kerr, advocated keeping
hands off as the policy.
Mr.. Garfield thought there were very
few in the House who w0uld consent to
do as Mr.. Butler had suggested, or to ven
ture in that direction in the absence of facts
other than those now before them. The
only pJoper course for the House at this
time, he thought, was to refer to the Com
mittee ON Judiciary the message of the
President, which was now on the Speakers
table, to see and report if any action on the
part of Congress was necessary. To that
end he would ask leave to offer as a substi-
tute to Mr.. SheldOn's resolution a res0lu-
ton referring the Presidents message, with
directions to report at as early day as
possible, and with leave to report at any
time.
Dir. Sheldon agreed to take the sense
of the House on the adoption of the substi-
tute.
The House then, by viva voce vote, &C.
cepted Mr.. Garfeld's substitute, and, as
amended, the resolution passed.
s--~zn----~-