The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-01-08

the present is fitted to exert SOLDERING inf1u-
ence on all minds that have any agency in
directing public opinion or controlling official
action. 1t is one OF those rare and momen-
tous occasions when inconsiderate appeals to
the passions of an excited community would
be wanton trifing with great interests and
would betoken shallow insensibility to The
magnitude Of the questions involved. The
public press in particular, which is the chief
sentinel on the watch tower of liberty, and
the most efficient engine for arousing and
guiding public sentiment has deep sense of
its responsibility in a conjuncture where it
recognizes its duty to be a champion of con-
stitutional liberty, and yet feels that impas-
stoned appeals for sound principles might
precipitate the country into inHammatory pro-
ceedings which would make the remedy more
fatal than the disease. The press Of
the country stands as mediator between
Congress and the people, and it is in danger,
in 80 great crisis, of SO arousing popular
passions as to put them beyond the control of
cautious reason. We are unalterably opposed
to violent and revolutionary methods of re-
dress. We have O firm and abiding faith in
the capacity Of our institutions to remedy
public wrongs by peaceful and legal methods.
We trust that there is sufficient love of lib
er!y, tempered by sobriety of judgment, to set
tie this unfortunate Louisiana difficulty with
out overstepping legal limits. Public senti-
ment in this community, at least, is fully
awake to the gravity of the situation. The
fact that the call for a public meeting is
signed by such eminent republican citizens as
William Cullen Bryant and Mr.. Evarts shows
stirred public feeling among that intelligent
class TO which the community looks for couu-
sci and guidance We believe that the views
of Mr.. Bryant and Mr.. Evarts are the views of
oil fair-minded citizens, not only here, but
throughout the Northern States. Moreover,
there is good reason to suppose that the same
opinion is held by clear-sighted members of
Congress- and particularly Speaker Blaine,
who, however we may rank him as a consti-
tutional lawyer, is unquestionably one of the
shrewdest judges of popular sentiment among
our public men. 1t is significant that Mr..
Hale, who proposed the bill for new election
in Louisiana, is Representative from Maine.
1t is not probable that he would have taken
such step without consultation with the most
distinguished and influential republican men,
Der from his own State. It may, indeed, be
said that Mr.. Blaine is scheming candidate
for the Presidency; but if this is admitted it
strengthens instead of invaldates the case
against President Grant It shows that the
astutest politician in the republican party
perceives the destructive effect Of sustaining
the action of the President in Louisiana. So
practised politician as Mr.. Blaine foresees
nothing but defeat and ruin in standing by
the policy of General Grant in case where
he is SO clearly in the wrong.
The unqualified Endorsement of the action
of General Sheridan by the President and
Cabinet, which has been officially commune
Gated to him by the Secretary of War, forbids
any hope that the President will reverse his
action unless Congress interposes to constrain
him. We do not see how Congress can evade
its responsibility. But what can Congress
do? Aside from passing bill of the same
general tenor as that offered by Mr.. Hale
there are several methods it could adopt
First the two houses might pass joint reso-
luton censuring the Presidents illegal inter-
ference with State Legislature, and declaring
that he exceeded his authority. This would
stay his hand and compel him to retreat; but
there are obvious party reasons why such a
vote of censure is impracticable. Secondly, he
might be impeached on perfectly solid
grounds, and if Congress were as hostile to
him as it was to President johnson this rem
edy would be promptly adopted. But the
party motives which prevent vote of censure
would be more effective against successful
impeachment Thirdly Congress might re-
wise the existing law, which clothes the Presi-
dent with authority to employ the public
force in suppressing instructions in State
on the application Of its Executive or Legisla-
ture. 1t might, for example, require the
sanction of three or some other number of the
Judges Of the Supreme Court before the Presi-
dent could employ the federal army in q
State; or it might impose limit of time be-
yond which the military power could not be
exerted, after insurrectionary opposition is
once put down, without o new application
from the State authorities, and forbidding any
interference except for the sole purpose of up
holding public order against armed bodies of
insurgents. But there is no reason for hoping
that any Of these methods win be adopted by
Congress in the present conjuncture.
But a remedy similar in substance to Mr.
Hale's bill, similar in substance to Senator
Carpenters bill two years ago, would be
entirely practicable and could not be con-
strued as an affront to the President General
Grant has repeatedly asked Congress to re-
leve him Of his responsibility in this Louisi-
ana difficulty, and there is no way in which
Congress could accede to these reiterated re-