New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-09-14
TIE LOUISIANA CASE AS A PRECEDENT.

| greSs at all at the next session, IL is per
haps as well to bear in mind the principa,
considerations that will influence any de-
cision that may be arrived at in the prem
ises. It is, in our judgment, extremely
doubtful whether Congress will assume
the functions of revisory tribunal, and
as such, review the various State decisions
that have been made in the several cues.
tons growing out of our recent election.
Any fact bearing upon the manner in
which the election was conducted and
argument adduced to sustain the report
Of the retu rning board are therefore to
be addressed to our State authorities hav-
ing the legal power to render final deci-
sion, while the inquiries o. Congress, If
any are made, should properly be di-
rected to ascertaining the competency OF
the various State agencies. Fortunately
we are in a condition to cite the au-
thority of our own Supreme Court
to sustain the present stdtu quo BY a
series of rulings in several cases, in some
of which, at least, the jurisdiction was
unquestioned, our highest legal tribunal
has uniformly held that the existing State
officers and the recognized General Assem-
bly, were legally elected last fall, and all
their official acts have been held to be de
jure and proper. So far, then, as the
State is concerned, the work has been per.
| fected and the only effect Of furnishing
| additional evidence will be to sustain the
propriety Of the judicial decisions. which
have been made upon q full hearing OF
evidence and careful consideration. So
far as our State officials are concerned,
then, Congress seems to possess no appel
late jurisdiction; but under the unlimited
grant Of power in each house to determine
the election and qualifications Of its own
members, the Senate possesses the I'M
doubted right to reject our Senator, with
out, however, calling in question the
competency OF the Legislature that
elected him.
We have no precedent in our history
for the subversion by Congress of duly
organized State government in harmony
with the national government. And there
is manifest reluctance on the part of the
leading statesmen in Congress to estab-
lish such a precedent; for every thinking |
man feels that if such a principle becomes
the settled policy of the nation the con-
troll of the State elections passes at once
into the hands of Congress, and hence
forth no State official, from Governor
down to a police juror, could hold his
Office without the consent, expressed NS
implied of the national legislature. For
if Congress may declare State election
invalid for fraud which the State authori-
ties have accepted, in one case, it may, Of
course, do so in any other. Apetition from
q petty officer in Kentucky that he had
not been fairly dealt with might lead to
setting aside the whole election, and it
would not require much Of q stride in the
same direction for Congress to proceed to
declare full set Of officers. from the
highest to the lowest,
Doubtless there have been irregularities
n nearly every State election that has
9een held since the foundation Of the
but as the remedy for che
wrongs that are committed can generally
'e obtained by applying to the local au- .
horities, it has never been deemed proper s
or Congress to interfere in such cases Of r
ispute. There can be no difference in y
rinciple between an interference by Con. |
ress in the case of one State officer and
S there is an organized government in !
be State at alone that has been de. {,
Jared by competent State authority to be +
lothed with the political power. We !,
it to be Tie rule that Congress !.
concluded in its inquiries as 20 the :.
etails. Before it can 90 behind the Dc. J,
isions of our Supreme Court and nulify ;,
s DEGREES, it must per force, set aside and =
bolish the court itself; and the success =,
Il exercise of such power in Louisiana a
,-day may be followed in Kentucky to- q
orrow, next day in New York, Pennsyl-
mia, Massachusetts,, and SO on, until not
supreme court or State government
onld remain in existence unless with the IL
'nsent Of Congress. We shall look in O.
lin in the constitution or the precedents it
the government for any warrant for g.
Ich an exercise of power. Not exen the g
ost thorough-going Federalist ever ad- ii
need such doctrine, nor contemplated b.
practical surrender to the national legis. g,
ture of the power of popular election. o,
The rather specious argument is ad- u
need by some Of the national statesmen, S.
at in Louisiana here, the Republican
rty being largely in the majority, new =.
ection must necessarily result in the O.
ccess of that party, and a triumphant N
futation of the claim Of the Fusionists TO
the victory last fall. But this argu- c.
emit, If such it may be called, proves too til
UGH. If the Republicans were in ma -
rity, as they concede, then they were n
lie to elect their candidates, unless there DC
IS fraud and cheating, and as fraud Vi q
ties everything favorable to those who hi
lploy it, it follows that the Repu blicans I
We already elected their ticket and have bl
light to demand the protection OF the til
VS. without being put 70 the risk and as
pense of new contest. The existence CO