The Opelousas journal. [volume] (Opelousas, La.) 1868-1878, 1875-02-19
A Protest.
fFrom the PicaYune. Feb. eth.l


Mr.. Mari, on behalf of the commit
tee of Seventy, yesterday laid before the
Conservative caucus a resolution con
demning the compromise as published
in the evening papers, or any other
compromise recognizing the legality of
the Kellogg Government" It has been
explained to us that the phrase " recog-
nizing the legality of the Kellogg Coy
ernment," is used expressly in order ito
guard against the appearance of deny
ing the de fact0 character of the KELLOGG
Government, that quality being admit
ted of necessity.
Tt is rather remarkable that the same
intelligence which saw the necessity of
using this phrase and of explaining the
objects with which itis unemployed, didnot
likewise perceive that, in this form, the
protest is totally inapDlicable to the
proposed adjustment. 1t would pr ,Zle
the most acute inquirer into the mys-
why the committee should have taken
so much trouble to frame a resolution of
protest which has no relation to the act
protested against. We have long ago
decided never to recognize the legality
of the Kellogg Government. In that
we are at one with the Committee Of
Seventy. We make no issue on that
point. No one in the State acting
with the Conservative party would con-
sent to such a recognition eitherin word
or act. And, we would most respect
fully and d~eferentially inquire where
the committee finds the evidence of any
such suggestion. The inference to be
drawn from the resolution is that the
committee, like everybody else, admit
the de fdctO character of the Kellogg
Government, but denies it's legality. TO
deny it's legality means, of course, TO
deny the legality of the methods and
processes by means OF which it was es-
tablished. From point of view this
is an historical fact which cannot. be
discredit it would be to ask them to
commit an absurdity of which none
possessed of average intelligence would
be guilty.
And now we again ask, who has made
any such proposition? The proposed
adjustment against which the resolution
protests admits precisely what the cCnn-
mittee admit-the de .fdctO character of
the Kellogg GOvernment-that is to say
it's actual existence. Of this fact we
have had sad experience during two
years, and we are likely to have the
same experience during the two years
to come. The resolution protests against
acknowledging the legality of the Kel-
logg Government, and this is precisely
what the adjustment also does, so far
as the Conservatives are concerned, 1t
is hard to see, therefore, why the com
mittee should have made any protest
on this point. But here comes the diff
ference. The adjustment proposes to
restore to the Conservatives their right
full control of the House of Representa-
tives. DOthe committee protest against
that? 1t proposes to furnish the means
by which the Conservatives can control
tlEk legislation of the State. Do the
cdnmittee protest against that? It pro-
pGses to provide us with the only pos
si6le method of achieving the reforms
which we all know to be SO necessary.
Does the committee protest against
that?
Itproposes to give us all the power to
repeal the Infamous election and regis
tration laws that we could hope for as a
consequence of the election OF 1874.
Does the committee protestagainst that
It proposes to place us in a position in
which we may assure ourselves of a fair
election in 1876, and thus place Louisi-
ana by the side of Virginia and Georgia
and Tennessee. Do the committee pro-
test against that? 1t offers us the only
opportunity we have yet had of doing
something to save the State form the
doom which has so long impended over
her-from speedy Authorization, from
deD%opulation, from despair, from utter
ruin. Do the committee protest against