The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-01-13
CONGRESSIONAL.
DEBATE ON LOUISIANA AFFAIRS.

CONGRESSIONAL.
DEBATE ON LOUISIANA AFFAIRS.
HOUSE.
j WASHINGTON, Jan. 12.-Some flibusterinI
defeated action upon the Civil Rights bill
Nothing occurred of interest to the South.
THE SENATE
had up to-day the resolution of Mr.. Schurz
instructing the Judiciary Committee to in
quire what legislation by Congress is neces
sary to secure to the people of Louisian,
their rights OF self-government under tn,
Constitution, and report with the least posi-
BILE delay, by bill or otherwise.
Mr.. Howe, of Wisconsin, criticised Mr.
Schurzs speech Of yesterday, and denied
that the army Of the United States had re-
moved from the Louisiana Legislature an,
members Of that body. He defended thu
course of Gen. Sheridan, and said he was no.
in command of New Orleans when the events
of Monday, January 4th, took place. Refer
ring to the speech of Mr.. Gordon, he sale
the Republican party did not hate any portion
of this country. All the laws, he remarked
made for the South, were also made for the
North.
The Republican party had poured out thu
treasure of the country as freely to open tn.
channels of the Southern ports as it had t.
open the Northern ones. He thought murder
was too common in the South, and was re-
garded there with much less adherence thar
in other portions of the country. Murde,
and other species of violence had been EN-.
ployed in the South for political purposes.
He spoke of the Red River troubles in Louisi-
ana, and said the perpetrators of those crimes
went unpublished.
Mr.. Gordon, Of Georgia, said the Republi-
cans were in charge of the State and had the
Judiciary. Therefore. if the majority of the
people supported the Kellogg government, as
was claimed by the Senators on the other side
of the chamber, how was it that the courts of
that State, aided by the army of the United
States, did not bring the perpetrators of these
crimes to justice?
MI. Howe replied he would not go into that
question now, but to the best of his iuforma-
ton the courts Of that State were weak.
Mr.. Gordon said the Senator by implication
if not direct words, charged that murders
were committed in Red River parish. If it
be true, it was most remarkable fact that
the attorney for Louisiana, who belonged to
the same party as the Senator, did not prose-
cute the criminals. The Senator had said the
courts were weak. II the attorney had not
the brains or nerve to draw up a bill of in
dictment, the Democratic party was certainly
not responsible. Applause in the galleries. ]
Mr.. Howe said no matter what the Senator
might think of personal qualification of the
attorney for Louisiana, he (Howe) would say
that if the Democratic party of Louisiana
would say to Gov. Kellogg that they would
sustain him in every effort to put down muir
der, no such transactions as took place in Red
River parish would ever take place again. He
believed if half dozen Senators on the De-
mocratic side of the chamber would not tole-
rate these offences there would be no moro of
them.
Mr.. Morton said it was well understood in
Red River parish that witnesses who testified
against these criminals, the grand Jurors who
were disposed to indict, or the petit Jurors
who were disposed to convict them, would be
murdered, and that was the reason why these
criminals in Louisiana had not been pun
ished
Mr.. Howe, resuming his argument, said
the Democrats were not the friends of colored
men; that party was united upon one subject,
and that was hostility to the negro. In de-
Tending the course of Gen. Sheridan, he said
the Senator from Delaware (Bayard) did him
injustice in his recent speech.
What offense had Gen. Sheridan committed?
He had suggested for most extraordinary
state of things, an extraordinary remedy. He
(Howe) thought that the Senator from Della
ware, instead of heaping condemnation upon
the head of Gen. Sheridan, should have
spent little Of his energy in the condemna-
tion of outrages which Sheridan denounced
He (Howe) did not think Senators should be
very harsh in consuming the conduct of Gen.
Sheridan-that officer did not say all the citi-
zens Of New Orleans were ''banditti," and as
l. la IA a.
Law, referred to by Sheridan, Congress could
see for itself that it was so.
Mr.. Bayard read Sheridan's dispatch in re-
ference to banditti, and that it was an ar
raignment of the whole community of New
Orleans. Personally he had scarcely an &C.
quaintance with Gen. Sheridan, and no desire
to detract from his merits as soldier, but it
seemed to him (Bayard) almost incredible
that Senator so advanced in years, and so
amiable as the Senator from Wisconsin,
should stand here to find fault with him for
stating that the conduct of Sheridan in New
Orleans, was that of human ferocity. The
Senator outside of this chamber would find
but one sentiment in regard to this dispatch
Did he not ask the President of the United
States to Issue a proclamation he had no more
right to issue than he had the right to issue q
bull in the name of the Pope.
Mr. Howe said Gen. Sheridan did not ask
the President to issue such q proclamation; he
only suggested that such a proclamation be
issued.
Gen. Sheridan stood there in the presence
Of murder He felt keenly and spoke strongly
He suggested remedy which the law would
not warrant.
He (Howe) did not regard that as evidence
Of human ferocity, especially in one trained
as soldier. Did the Senator from Delaware,
,Bayard) believe that there was Senator in
the chamber, especially on the Republican
side, who would consent to the slightest in
fraction of our Constitution Did he believe
that the Republican party wanted to substi-
tute despotism for a constitutional govern
ment?
Mr.. Bayard said he could scarcely believe
that the Senator asked him that question Sc
riously. He did believe that the Republican
party had trampled upon the Constitution
until there was scarcely a vestige of it left.
He had seen effort after effort to break it
down, till he believed, as he believed in his
existence, that the party paid no respect to it.