The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-02-08
The Louisisna Question In It's Latest
ASpocts.

decided to-day, and there is too much reason
to fear that no agreement will be reached.
There are only two practical ways by which
that unfortunate State can be tranquillized,
and we fear that to-day's proceedings will re-
duce the number to one The two methods
are-frst. mutual concessions by the parties,
and, second, new and fair election under
the authority of Congress. We will consider
them in their order
Frst.-An arrangement by the citizens is,
on all accounts, the fttest and most desirable
method of terminating this quarrel Con-
gress should interfere only as last resort,
when all other remedies have failed. Propo-
sitions for compromise were listened to with
great favor and approval by the eminently
fair subcommittee, consisting of Messrs.
Foster, Phelps and Potter. who first visited
New Orleans to take testimony. The COM
mittee now there are attempting to bring
about a settlement by similar method
and after securing the assent of the
conservative members of the Legislature
the plan seems likely to miscarry by the
energetic opposition OF McEnery and the ag-
eressive democrats The fact that great
public meeting was assembled in the streets
on an impromptu call Saturday afternoon, to
protest against the compromise, shows how
near it was to success when such sudden re-
sstance was thought necessary tor defeating
it. The substance of the proposed compro-
mise, as we understand it, is to give the con-
servatves the full advantage of the election
of 1874, and leave the republicans in posses
sion Of the offices awarded them by the Re
turning Board after the election of 1872, and
then to maintain, by mutual consent the
status quo until after the election of 1876,
when new Governor will be chosen to take
the place of Kellogg There is no easier
or better way out of the present complication
than by compromise on this basis. 1t
would put the conservatives in the position
they would have occupied had the late can
wasting board dealt honestly with the returns,
and would enable them, by one more victory,
to completely dispossess their opponents
by the rectifying agency of the ballot. This
would be infinitely preferable to remedy by
physical violence, such as was attempted in
September, and altogether better than re-
sort to the extreme medicine OF Congressional
interference. We shall sincerely deplore the
failure of a compromise which would give
the conservatives what they won in Novem-
Der and put them i'll the way OF quietly substi-
tuting democratic successor in the next cleo
ton. This is the easiest and surest method
of establishing tranquility for the ensuing two
years.
Second If the compromise should be de-
feated there is no other immediate practical
remedy than for Congress 10 order an cleo
ton, with efficient safeguards for its fair
ness 1t is asserted that the only thing needed
| is for the President to withdraw the federal
troops and leave Kellogg to be again ousted
by violence, as he was in September. Revo-
lutionary remedies are always TO be depre-
Gated, and certain it is that the federal troops
will not be Withdrawn to give place
to them. To contend for this method, under
existing circumstances is virtually to insist
that things shall remain as they are without
any remedy at all until 1876. 1t is, no doubt,
within the competency of Congress to direct o
withdrawal of the troops, and let McEnerys
|
body knows that Congress will consent to do
nothing of the kind. A majority of Congress
believe that neither Kellogg nor McEnery was
legally elected, and they will not turn one
bogus Governor out merely to let what they
regard as another bogus Governor in. On
the theory that neither was elected and that
Kellogg is a usurper what ought Congress to
do? 1t would seem a pretty clear case for
the constitutional guarantee of republican
government.
But we are met here by objections which,
though from high source, do not convince
the strongest arguments that can be adduced
against our own views and accordingly lay
before them this morning the letter of Mr.
George Ticknor Curtis, who strenuously
opposes any Intervention by Congress-
Having invited an expression of Mr.
Curtis views, we cannot pass them in silence
lest silence should be construed as approval
Mr.. Curtis makes an oblique reference to
his 'History of the Constitution" pub
lished more than twenty years ago, saying
that the opinions he now holds were formed
while preparing that work. and that he has
seen no reason to change them. But we have
turned over its pages in fruitless search for
the belittling estimate he now puts on the
guarantee section, and his present strong as
sertion of 'tbe independent sovereignty and
the autonomy of the States" Throughout
his history Mr.. Curtis is an undisguised and
most admiring disciple of Hamilton, but in
this letter he goes beyond Calhoun in denying
from Mr.. Curtis instructive history that the
very existence of the federal constitution is
due to the felt necessity for an external
guarantee of the State governments. He
deliberately dwells on the want of such q