Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-03-28
ONELrrrnE WORD. aIN.n

The Chicago Times takes the comical
position that in finally passing this
resolution, ''the extreme Radicals have
obtained all they at first desired, not
through their own efforts, but through
the assistance of their so-called adver-
saries, the Democratic leaders," Its
logic is that the resolution was harm
less and insignificant as it stood, until
a broader construction was given by
the efforts of the Democrats to amend,
thus:
Mr.. Thurman, assisted by other
Democrats, insisted upon giving the
Endorsement a scope that while it may
have been intended by its authors, was
not warranted by its language. Mr..
Thurman proposed three different
amendments to the resolution: l. That
it should not be construed as acknowl-
edging that Kellogg is de- ure the Gov
ernor of Louisiana; 2. That it should
not be construed as affirming the legal
ity Of the Legislature that elected
L AuCuDdCh " LLC GCuGLCg d1u D. 4ue-I
it should not be construed as approx
ing the use of troops in the organiza-
ton Of the Legislature in January last.
These amendments we're successfully
voted down, as Mr.. Thurman no doubt
expected they would be, and the Re-
publican party was committed, by I'M
phcation, at least, to an endorsement Of
every part Of Mr.. Grants Louisiana
policy.
Since it abandoned the Democratic
party and Democratic usages Of strict
construction the Times has not been
very fortunate IN the construction of
language. The resolution as adopted
involves the endorsement of every act
that Thurman sought to exclude from
its operation. It's phraseology is as
follows:
Resolved, that the action of the
President IN protecting the govern
ment in Louisiana, of which VIM. P.
Kellogg is the Executive, and the
people of the State against domestic
violence, and enforcing the laws of the
United States, Is approved.
Whether designed or not, by its Rad
ical trainers, the single word Gin"
which we italicize, gives the resolution
all the scope that the EXTREMIST Radi-
cal could have desired. What sis ap-
proved" by it? 1.-THE action of the
President" What action? His action
"in protecting the government Of Lou
isiana," etc. This includes all his
action in the premises. an protecting
the government" Grant recognized
Kellogg as Governor de jure DureIIi;
''in protecting" he recognized the
Pinchback Legislature; Gin protect
ing" he used troops to disorganize the
Legislature last January. These are
part, and the main part, of ''the action
of the President in protecting"
etc. If that naughty in we're
not in, the Times might have
a peg on which to hang its bubble. If
the resolution rad read: ''The action
Of the President protecting the gov
eminent Of Louisiana" ETC., the en-
dorsement would be limited to such
acts or action only as did protect; but
the naughty Gin" makes the resolution
endorse all the acts of the President
'in protecting" But why stand on
such hair solitting. The resolution
was designed by its authors to mean
all this. The Democrats brought out
its full meaning by offering amend
ments which the better Republicans
ike Christiancy might have seconded,
if they did not wish to endorse the dis
tinct outrages specified. Their sy-
cophancy to Grants managers has not
helped themselves, nor the President,
MOI. the Marty