The Opelousas courier., 1874-01-31
Texas and LOmisiama-WhY TN
Difference p
IN. Y. Sun. Jan. 20.1


When controversy arose a year since be-
tween Kellogg and McEnery as to which was
elected Governor of Louisiana, Gen. Grant
found no difficulty to prevent his interference
with Federal bayonets i'll behalf of Kellogg
He invoked the reconstruction acts and the
Constitutional amendments, and acting upon
the written opinion of George II. Williams,
he ordered Col. Emory to keep McEnery out
of the State House and protect Kellogg there.
The recent and perhaps still pending con-
troversy in Texas between Coke and Davis,
in respect to which is tue legal Governor of
the State, is, in all matters which affect the
Federal authority and the right and duty of
the President to interfere, similar to the con-
test in Louisiana. So far as there is any es-
sential difference between them the reasons
for Federal intervention are far more plausi-
BILE in the case of Texas than in that of Loui
| siana for the claim OF Davis to hold on to the
Governorship till April next really involves
some nice questions which spring directly out
| of the act of Congress restoring Texas to the
Union, and out of the new Constitution she
brought with her.
On the other hand, when the conflict be-
tween Kellogg and McEnery began Louisiana
had been fully restored to the Union more
| than six years, and the points in issue arose
wholly under the election laws of the State.
Indeed, the real question i'll controversy was
whether Kellogg, whom McEnery had beaten
fairly by about ten thousand majority, should
be counted in by frauds that would have
amazed William NJ. Tweed and made the
wooden Indian on Tammany Hall hang his
| head for shame, and be then forced into office
| under color of Durell's usurping decree, and
| subsequently kept there by the guns of the
army-and all done in pursuance of the order
| of President Grant, which purported to be
based upon the opinions of Attorney General
| Williams.
Always ready to interfere and go all lengths
| for the Kellogg Government, why does Grant
now hesitate to interpose in behalf of Davis {!
Both OF these so-called Governors are Repub-
| icans, while Coke, who claims the chair of
Davis, is as firm a Democrat as McEnery, who
claims the seat of Kellogg. Why does Will
| liams, who one year ago, by order of the Presi-
dent, dashed off kilograms to New Orleans ap-
proving the Illegal decree of the venal Durell,
and sanctloning the employment OF the troops
by Marshal Packard to aid in enforcing it
why does he now telegraph to Austin and in
form Davis that his claim is a doubtful one,
and the refore the President must deny his ap-
| plication for troops to sustain it
The obvious answer to this question is full
of instruction; and it is twofold. In the
first place, James F. Casey, who is the brother
in-law of Grant, was appointed by him Col
lector of New Orleans soon after his own inau-
guration and frem that day till this, though
Casey is shallow fellow for so big a rascal,
| he has exerted great Influence over the State
Government of Louisiana, and has borne full
| sway in its counsels ever since the supple kel-
| lOgS CFdWieu luGO INC Seat UI ING
| Warm0th. A brother-in-law being in the
case of course Grant embraced the earliest
plausible pretext to overthrow the rightful
| Government of Louisiana in the interest OF
that brother-in-law. But Davis has no Casey
at his elbow, and therefore Judges, Marshals,
| and Colonels are not ordered to come to his
aid.
However, if the next House of Representa-
! tives is composed of such political elements as
we think it will be, Grant will then wish that
Casey had been at the bottom of the sea ere
the day dawned when he persuaded him to
| interfere in the contest between two rival
| claimants to the Governorship of Louisiana,
and by force set aside its statutes, its consti-
tuition, and its duly elected State officers. And
here we touch the very core of the reasoG Jot
| Grants hesitancy in the Texas case. He we'll
knows that if any act could have been proven
| against Andrew Johnson one-tenth as hagrant
as the outrages he has perpetrated and still
| continues to perpetrate against the legally
chosen authorities in Louisiana, johnson
would certainly have been convicted on his
impeachment trial, and perhaps handed over
| to the criminal courts for still further punish
ment.
To come right to the point, Grant and viii
liams have got frightened and have backed
down in regard to Texas from the ground
they assumed in respect to Louisiana. And
it is well for them that they have. The coun
try is in 10 mood of mind to stand fresh as
saults of this sort upon the fundamental prin
ciples of government. 1t has seen the Consti
tuition wrested quite too often to subserue the
interest of hordes Of pluudering carpet.ba
gers, hundreds of whose leaders ought to have
been in the penitentiary long ago. Nor does
it soethe the feelings Of the myriads of Repub
lican abolitionists who labored early and late
to obtain emancipation for the negroes to see
these Southern adventurers and their abettsrs
in the North overturnng State governments
by force, seducing Judges by money, and
thrusting their hands into public treasures
in all directions, under the hypoeritical pre-
text that these things are essential to secure
the rights of the enfranchised class.
The Republicans may draw once too Otter
upon the distrust of a majority of the people
for the old Bourbon Democracy. BY clinglng
too closely to certain of their chiefs the Re
publicans may raise the clear, square issue il
1876 whether it is not better to try the rHle o.
party which does not love negroes quite
well enough rather than submit longer to 9
party whose managers love stealing far. tot
well.