Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1875-01-30
ALEXANDRIA,, VA.
SATURDAY, JANUARY 80, 1876.
observation-disclosures.

Federal Interference.
As very strong evidence OF public sentl
msnt at the North in reference to the inter
ference of the Federal Government IN State
matters at the South we give the following
articles, the first from the New York o.
ssrver," one of the Lost Influential and largely
circulated papers of the Presbyterian Church,
and the second from the Church aud State,
Episcopaan:
From the New York Observer
The evidence is all TO- We have heard both
yidss aud all sides. Sheridan, Kellogg, the
two parties 10 the Legislature, the President OF
the United States, and the Committee OF the
House Of Representatives appointed to aSeer-
ssin the facts. 10 the midst OF all this teStl
msny We ought surely to 6ud the truth:
Aud it is remarkable fact that 10 all ponts
essential 10 the formation of an opinion az TO
tho oons,itutionaIity of the action OF the NTH
ary in sxpelling persons from the Legislative
Hall, there is little or no conflict OF evidence.
Is i, 10 tho testimony of all parties and all wit
nsssss, and all advocates, that soldiers OF the
United States army entered the Hall of the
Louisiana Legislature and took out five men by
force We have nowbere seen the case more
clearly stated and stripped of all needless ap-
perdsses than in the remarks Ut Senator
3ehutz 10 his place in the Senate OF the Unlted
S.aess:
''It ia said in extenuatiop of the interference
Of tho military power IF the United States that
the persons elected from the Legislature by
the Federal soldiery we're not legally members
of that Legislature. Suppose that had been
90 but that is not the question. The question
is Where is the constitutional principle, the
Law authorizing Uaited States soldiers with
nu.kets 10 their hands to determine who Is a
legally elected member Of a State Legislature
and who not? 1t is said that that mode OF or
ssnzing that Legislature was not IN accord
apse with the statutes of the State. Suppose
tia. had been so but that is not the question.
The question is, Where is the constitutional or
legal warrant for The bayooets of the Federal
soldiery to interpret the statutes Of States aud
50 decide for and 10 Legislature points OF par
Ismeptary law? 1t is said that the Governor
requested the aid of the United States soldiers
70 purge the Legislature of illegal members
That may be so but that is not the question
The question is, Where is the law authorizing
United States soldiers to do the bidding OF a
State Governor who attempts to decide who
are to be the members Of a Legislature regu
Iarly convened at the place and at the time
fixed BY law? 1t is said that trouble was
threatebed between contending parties 10 Lou
isiana Suppose that had been so but that Is
not the question. The question is, Where Is
the law from which the national government,
in case of threatened trouble IN State, de-
rives its power to inyade Legislative body by
armed force to drag out persons seated as mem
bers of State Legislature that others may
take their places? Where is the law, l ask
You will search the Constitution and the
statutes in vain.
The report Of the Congressional Committee
ahows:
First-Thas the last election in Louisiana
was, 10 the words Of the committee, full, fair,
frss and peaceable." SecoDd-That it result
ed in the election Of democratic majority of
twenty nine 10 the lower House Of the Leglsla-
ture. Tbird-That the report Of the Return
ing Board was fraudulent, unjust aud contrary
70 the very law under which it acted.
There is therefore no doubt on the minds OF
the people of the Uuted States that the lnva-
sion of the Legislature was wholly unjuStlh-
able.
From the Church and State.
The interference of the ratioual government
III Louisiana has been followed by a similar in
reference at Eicksburg 10 the cj.ctment Of a
Sheriff from bis Office by Uuited States troops.
We have 90 full account OF tire circumstances
under which this took place. 1t does not APP
pear indeed that it was authorized by the Pres
ident. and he may promptly disclalm all re-
spousbility in regard to it. Blu. the impress
sion which it makes is painful one, coming
~ it does so Immediately after the difficulty 10
Louisana. The danger Of roo great centra-
liz..iou of power is now the peril to which We
ars specially exposed, and u regard to which
the most serious appreheuslous are justified.
Thi. question is by 20 means party one. 1t
relates TO constitutional law, aud to the tunda-
mental principles of our government. 1t Is 10
tsrsstiug and curious to notice how somc of
The old aud lifelong opponents of slavery, the
sbo!itionists before The war, differ 10 regard to
thi. subject Mr. Wendell Phillips. 10 an im-
prouptu speech in Faneul Hall, Boston, de-
feuded the Administration. 1t was emluenty
characteristic of Mr.. Phillips in the tact that
il advocated the most unreasonable views 10
the most reasonable and plausible manner.
Nj. Whittier, the venerable poet, 90 the other
hasd. has written letter in which, with his
accustomed gen,leness and justice, he points
out the danger of executive interfersoce 10 the
lssislation Of the States. This interference, be
ssass, is as likely TO be in the Interest OF OPP
preston as 10 the maintenance OF liberty.
----------------
Gen. John &. Breckenridge
The people of the South, aud, We believe,