The Portland daily press., 1875-01-12


under their protection, organized the Leg'sla-
ture TO suit themselves. This is what ha opened
in the State House of Louisiana on the 4th of
January
Sir, there is one thing which every free peo-
Pile living under Constitutional government
watches with peculiaT jealousy, as the most es-
sentiai safeguard of representative institutions.
1t is the absolute freedom of the legislature
from interference on the part of the executive
power, especially by force, therefore it is "a truly
constitutional government wbetherthe proceed
ings of the legislature be good or bad Such an
interference, especially as concerns the admis
sion of its own members, must be most emphat-
ically condemned and most clrefuliy guarded
against. Whether it proceeded from Cover
nor OF a President or King, under whatever
circumstances or pretext, and whenever such
interference is successfully carried out it is al
ways and justly looked upon as sure symptom
of the decline of free Institutions
There is another thing which especially the
American people hold as sacred as the life eie.
ment of their republican freedom. 1t is the
right to govern and administer their local af-
fairs independently, through the exercise of
self government, which lies in the organism of
the state, and, therefore, we find in the consti-
tuition of the republic the power of the Lation-
al government to interfere in state affairs most
scrupulousy limited to certain well defined
cases and the observance of certain prescribed
FORMS and if these limitations he arbitrarily
discarded by national authority, we shall surely
say That our system OIL rcpuoiiCdu governments
is in danger. We are, by recent events in
Louisiana, forced TO enquire how the cause of
local self government and of legislative prv-
leges stands to-day in the United States. Be
fore LAYING their hands upon things SO import
ant and sacred the authorities should have well
assured themselves they bad the clearest most
obvious and most unequivocal warrant of law
for their doing. What is that warrant? In
the Constitution we fnd but one sentence re-
ferring to the subject 1t says in section IA,
article 4, that the United States shall guaran-
tee to every state in the Union republican
form of government, and shall protect each of
them against invasion, and on application of
the Legislature or of the Executive when the
Legislature cannot be convened, against do
nestle violence.
There are two statutes prescribing the mode
in which this is to be done, the statute of 1875
and the statute of 1907 The former provides
that in the case of an instruction in any state
against the government thereof it shall be law
full for the President of the United States, on
the application of the legislature Of such state
or of the executive, when the legislature can
not be convened, to call upon the militia of the
other states to suppress the insurrection. The
statute of 1907 authorizes the President to en-
poy the regular army and navy for the same
purpose, having first observed the prerequisites
of law. That is all!
There had been in Louisiana on the 18th of
September, 1874, an instruction against the
state government recognized by the President.
That state government had been overthrow by
insurgents. The President having been called
upon by acting Governor Kellogg, issued his
proclamation commanding the insurgents to
desist. They did so at once and the Kellogg
government was restored and has not been at
tackled since. The insurrection was totally
ended on the 4th of January. There was no
insurrection and the state of Louisiana was
quiet, the laws were obeyed; there was no do
nestle violence, not even an attempt at it. The
state house was surrounded by armed forces of
the Governor; these forces were not resisted !;
their services were not called into requisition;
there was certainly no demand upon the Pres-
dent for military interference by the Legis-
lature, nor was there by the Governor, in case
tbs Legislature could not be convened, for the
Legislature did convene at the time and in the
place fixed by law, and was called to order by
the officer designated by law, and yet, there be-
ing neither instruction nor domestic violence,
there being neither Call for military interior
ence upon the President by the Legislature nor
by the Governor in case the Legislature could
not be convened, there being not the remotest
shadow of non-Observance of all the prere-
quisites of law provided by the statute, the
troops of the United States proceeded, not
against an instruction, not against body of
men committing domestic violence, but against
a Legislative body, and the soldiers were used
to execute an order of the Governor determin-
ing what persons should sit in that Legislature
as its members.
What provision of the constitution, what
laws are there on the statute book furnishing
a warrant for such proceedings?
1t is said in extenuaton of the interference
of the military power of the United States,
that the persons elected from the legislature by
the federal soldIery were not legally elected
members of that legislature Supposed that it
had been so. That is not the question. The
question is, where is the constitutional prlncI-
cipie, where the law, authorizing the United
States soldiers, with muskets in their hands, to
determine who is legally elected member of
a state legislature an who is not? 1t IS said
said that the mode of organizing that legisla-
ture was not in accordance with the statutes OF
the state. Suppose that had been so, but that
is not the Question. The question is, where is
the constitutional or legal warrant for the bay
onets of federal soldiery to interpret the stat
utes CT states and to decide for a legislature
the points of parliamentary law. 1t is said
that the Governor requested the aid of United
States soldiers to purge the legislature of ile-
gal members That may be so, but that is not
the question The question is, where is the law
authorizing the United States soldiersito do the
bidding of state governor who attempts to
decide who are to be the members of a legisla-
ture regularly convened at the place and at the
time fixed by law. 1t is said that trouble was
threatened between the contending parties in
Louisiana. Suppose that had been so, but that
is not the question.
The question u.s. where Is the law from which
the national government, in case of threatened
trouble in a state, derives its power to invade
legislative body by armed force and to drive
out persons seated as members of state legis
lature that Others may take their places?
Where is the law. ask? You will search the
constitution and statutes in vain. 1t is my de-
lberate judgment, conscienti0usly formed, that
the deed done on the 4th of January in Louis
lana constitutes a gross and manifest violation
of the constitution and laws. We have an act
before US indicating spirit in our government
which either ignores the constitution and laws
m so in tS he fha thew cpa he the
safeguard of the independence of legislation,
the rights and liberties of the people, and that
spirit shows itself more alarming still in the
instrument the executive has chosen to carry
out his will. No American citizen can have
read without regret and equally profound APP
predecessor the recent dispatches of Gen.
Sheridan to the Secretary of War, in which he
suggests that numerous class of citizens
should by wholesale be outlawed rs bandtti by
a mere proclamation of the President to be
delivered over to a military command for sum-
mary judgment by military commission.
No one respects Gen. Sheridan more than
do for his brilliant deeds upon the field of bat
tie. The nation has delighted in honoriug his
to see the hero of the ride of Winchester and
the charge at Five Forks stain his name by an
attempt to override laws and lead charge
against the constitutional rights of his country
men The policy he has proposed is so appal-
ling that every American citizen who loves his
of the suggestion. 1t is another illustration
how great a man may be as a soldier, and chow
ccnspcuously unable to understand what civil
rights and constitution mean, bow glorious in
fighting for you, but how little fit to govern
you, and yet Gen. Sheridan is not only kept in
Louisiana as the instrument as the Executive
will, but after all that has happened, encourage
ed by the emphatic approval of the Executive
branch of the national government.
l confess all these things have alarmed me,
and not me alone, for in all parts of the coun-
try the press is giving voice to the same feel
ing.
What I learn by private information con-
VinceS me that the press is pot exaggeratlng
the alarm of the people, On all sides we hear
the question asked if this can be done in Louis
lana, if such things be sanctioned by Congress,
how long before it will be done in Massachusetts,
and Ohio. How long before the constitutional
rights of all the states the self government of
all the people will oe trampled under foot?
How long before general of the army may
set in the chair you occupy to decide contested
elections in order to make majority in the
Senate? and before a soldier will stalk into the
House of national Representatives, and, point
ing to the Speakers mallet, say, Take away
that bauble"
Wild and exaggerated as these apprehen-
sons may seem yet these are the feelings you
will hear expressed when the voice of the peo-
pie penetrates to you, and [ would ask you
can you say what is possible aud what not.
Who is there among US who but three years
rgo would have expected to be called upon to