Litchfield enquirer., 1875-01-21
EVIDENCES OF INTIMIDATION.

EVIDENCES OF INTIMIDATION. sE That there was intimidation of republi can voters at the election, nOtWithstaIlotF ing these precautions. admits of no doabss The following are specimens of the means used: sss~-a-a
 On the 14th of October eighty persons. signed and published the following at Shreveport: eve the undersigned merchants of the city of Shreveport, in obedience to re- quest of the Shreveport campaign club. agree to use every endeayor to get our employees to vote the peoples ticket at the ensuing election, and in the event of their refusal so to do or in case they vote the radical ticket, to refuse to employ them st the expiration of their present contracts On the same day another large body of persons published H. the same place a paper in which they used the following language: e
 ''We the undersigned merchonts of the citp of Shreveport, alive to the great im- portance of securing good and honest gov ernment to the state, do agree and pledge ourselves not to advance any supplies of money to any planter the coming year who will give employment or rent lands to la borers who vote the radical ticket in the coming election"
 have no information of the proceed ings of the returning board for said cleo tion which may not be found in its report which has been published; but it IS mat ter of public information that great part. of the time taken to canvass the votes was consumed by the arguments of lawyers, several of whom represented each party before the board I have no evidence that the proceedings of this board were not in accordance with the law under which they. acted. Whether in excluding from their count certain returns they were right or wrong is a question that depends upon the evidence they had before them; but 1t is very clear that the law gives them the power, if they chose to exercise it, of de- ciding that way, and prinaG facie, the per- sons whom they return as elected are en- titled to the offices for which they were candidates. -c THE LATE INTERFERENCE.
 Respecting the alleged interference by the military with the organization of the legislature of Louisiana on the 4th m-l stant. I have no knowledge or information which has not been received by me since that time and published. My first in- formation was the papers of the morning of the 9th of January. I did not know that any such thing was anticipated, and no orders nor suggestions were ever given to any military officer in that state upon that subject prlor to the occurrence. I' am we'll aware that any military interfer-l ence by the officers or troop of the United States with the organization of state leg. islature, or any of its proceedings, or with any civil department of the government. is repugnant to our idea of government. | can concieve of no case, not involving re- belIon or lnsurrection, where such inter ference by authority of the general gov! 'ernment ought to be permitted. or can be. justified. But there are circumstances connected with the late legislative imbro- glio in Louisiana which seem to exempt; the military from any intentional wrong in that matter, knowing that they had been placed in Louisiana to prevent doe. mestic violence and to aid in repressingit The revolution was apparently, though 1t is believed not really, abandoned. and the cry of federal usurpation and tyranny in Louisiana was renewed with redoubled energy. Troops had been sent to the state under the requisition of the gover- nor, and a.. s.other disturbance seemed i'm minent, they were allowed to remain there to render the executive such aid as might become necessary to enforce the laws of the state and repress the continued vio- lence which seemed inevitablethe moment the federal force should be withdrawn.
 THE USE OF TROOPS
 Prior to and with 8 view to the late cleo ton in Louisiana, white men associated themselves together in armed bodies call ed white leagues, and at the same time threats were made in the democratic jour nals of the state that the election should be carried against the republicans at all hazards. which very naturally greatly al- armed the colored voters. By section 8 of the act of February 28, 1871, it is made the duty of the United States marshals and their representatives in congress, to keep the peace and prevent any violations of the so-called enforcement acts, and oth- CT offenses against the laws or the United States; and upon the acquisition of the marshal of Louisiana, and in view of said armed organization and other portentous circumstances, caused detachments of troops to be stationed in various localities in the state to aid him in the performance of his official duties in the enforcement of the state laws. The officers and troops of the United States may all have supposed that it was their duty to act when called upon by the governor for that purpose
 Each branch of a legislative assembly Is the judge of the election and qualifications of its own members; but if mob, or a body of unauthorized persons, seize and hold the legislative hall, in tumultuous and riotOus manner, and so prevent any organization by those legally returned as elected, it might become the duty of the state executive to interpose, if requested by majority of the members elect, to suppress the disturbance and enable the persons elected to organize the house. Any exercise of this power would only bejusti- fable under most extraordinary circum- stances, and it would then be the duty of the governor to call upon the constabu- lary, or, if necessary, the military force of the state.
 But with reference to Louisiana it is to be borne in mind that any attempt by the governor to use the police force of that state at thls time would have undeubted- ly precipitated bloody conflict with the white league, as it did on the 4th of Sep tember. There is no doubt but that the presence of the United States troops up- on that occasion prevented bloodshed and the loss of life. F =@ 'a3-57 Both parties appear to have relied up on them as conseryators of the public peace. The first call was made by the democrats to remove persons obnoxious to them from the legislative hall and the second was from the republicans to re-
 move persons who had usurped seats in the legislature without legal certificates authorizing them to take seats, and in sui ficient number to change the majority. Nobody was disturbed by the military
 who had 6 legal right at that time to oe- cupy seat in the legislature. That the democratic minority of the house under
 took to secure it's organization by fraud
 and violence; that in this attempt they
 took to make persons not returned as cleo ted. members, so as to create majority;
 that they acted under preconcerted plan, and, under false pretences, introduced in-
 to the hall body of men to support their pretentensions by force, if necessary; and \ txn& sS~k d