New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-04-09

IAO0' Ou0 tuo 09uavOE was 0xCo0OlOglv q
fortunat in one thing. He undertook
chow that was inconsistent. He read ,
extract from my report in the Louisiau
case to show that I denied the power of Il
Senate to go back and inquire whether Il
members OF q Legislature had been electe
to inquire whether the tribunals of tl
State, which had passed upon the quail
cation of members Of the Legislature, ooul
De lmpeached, and that We are bound
take the Legislature 40 the State gave it
us. 1stand upon that doctrine to-day.
have not in any speech on the Mississip]
resolution said one word in conflict vii
that position, and the Senator can not poil
it out.
l am consistent; bat the Senator info
tunately is not and he stands up here tt
day in contradiction of the ground that b
occupied all through the Louisiana contrt
versy. 1t is within the memory of tn
members Of this body that he argued v
had right to inquire whether the member
OF the Legislature who elected Pinchbac
had themselves been elected, denied tn
that election, and by his vote finally in
sisted and stood upon that doctrine. Ds
after day he has advocated that doctrin
here; but to-day he comes in and denie,
| that doctrine, and insists that We can mo-
| inquire into the election in Mississippi.
was perfectly competent to inquire int
it in Louisiana in the Pinchback
case, but it is not competent to in
quire into it in Mississippi, in the
Lamar case. As the lawyer said to tn,
farmer, circumstances alter cases." Til,
doctrine in regard to Louisiana. which tn
Senator, 90 ably, so eloquently: and go Otter
day. Therefore l say have an immens.
advantage over the Senator. am con
sistent and he is not. He seemed to thinA
consistency was an important thing.
rather like it myself; but he is q most mel
anchOly evidence that men may bo inc0n
sistent and apparently not know it. It il
said that the ostrich, when pursued by the
hunters in the desert, will st,ok his head
into the sand and be under the impression
that his whole body is concealed.
The Senator said in the conclusion of his
that sentiment. Let " have peace. When
the murder business stops, when intimida-
ton and outrage in the Southern States
stop, then we shall have peace; but not
until then. When majority of 10000 in
Mississippi can be overcome by murder, by
violence and fraud, and Democratic ma
jority Of $4,000 put in its place, SO long as
those things are done we can not have
peace. When 3 majority in louisiana of
10000 can be overcome by fraud and vio-
lence and blo0dshed we can not have peace
When . majority in Alabams Of 10000 to
Is 900 can be overcome in the same way it
is idle for those persons who sympa-
thize with them or defend them to talk
about peace. peace when there is no
peace" When this violence shall cease,
and when men of all parties and of ali
colOrs in the South have equal rights, then
there will be peace. 1t is q short and an
easy road. 1t seems the crime is NOT in
murder. The crime is not in
the intimidation and oppression of millions
Of people, but the crime is in talking about
ing the former serenity of the Senate and of
the country. The Senate has not one word
TO say about all this scene Of bloodshed and
violence in the South, but his whole COM
3laint is that we talk about it here and
create feeling in the country.
The Senator represented me as having
Issailed all the white population Of the
south. 1have never done go. l assaulted
ne murderers of the South; those who
rampled upon the rights of white and
lack Republicans; and do it again. Not
rly that, bat assail their defenders. To
he loyal people of the South, the peace
bile and the law abiding people, extend
fellowship and fraternity: and l say here
What every man from the North knows is
rue, that in the North there is no animos-
" toward the South; there is no feeling of
aired toward the people Of the South. If
republicans in the South, white and black,
Ould enjoy the same rights tina. Democrats
njOy everywhere in the North there would |
g return of fraternity, of fellowship, of |
atiOnal love. 1t is the existence of these |
'rongs that keeps alive this bitterness of |
'eling, but it does not extend to the whole |
outh; it extends to the perpetrators and |
, their aiders and absttors, be they North |
: South.
The Senator has referred to the decision |
the Supreme Court on Monday. l shall |
8 frank enough to say that regard those /
ecisions as unfortunate, but it is not my
usiness or duty here to criticise them or
1deavor to explain them. The Senator
lad an extract from the case of Cruik-
rank, l believe from Louisiana, which
lOuld be glad to have.
Mr.. Mo:ton-I can not refer to the pas
Ige, but he quoted to this effect: That the
amendment in its frst section
emit no further than to deny to State,
sting afirmatively, q right to deny equal
objection Of the laws, or the right to
ithhOld the enjoyment of the rights and
ivileges OF q citizen of the United States;
lat the constitution went no further than
State By her legislation-the
,natOr used the word "iegisIation"-from
,ny;ng the right Of colOred man to vote,
denying the equal protection of the laws;
I'd that, unless the State did that, the
terfere. l do Not know whether the Su-
eme Court said that, but if they did, so
r as l am concerned I repudiate i, ut
rly. have sOMa knowledge of the cir
instances under which those amend
ents were adopted. l read the
bates which occurred. l was pres
It when one OF them passed this body,
ID took some little part in it, and l profess
understand what was the spirit of Con.
ess at that tine and the understanding
the country. What Is it for State to
ny the equal protection of the laws!
hen State by ner legislation expressly
election of the laws, that is one thing;
g when State government utterly fails 1
protect large class of her people that
denying to them the equal protection of
Q laws. 1t is the duty of the State to :
otect every class of her population; and
len q State fails to do it, do not care
,ether that failure is intentional on the
TT OF the officers Or the result of the
akness or imbecility of the State gov {
nment, it is denying the equal protection
the laws, and Congress can come in and j
rnish that protection.
This was the understanding with which t
tn those amendments were passed. l {
Ow it, ard we all know it. 1t was to I
ICE the enforcement of each amendment G
the power of Congress; and it was then G
, understanding-and l can tell the Su- '
.me Court, humble as l am, if they do @
know it-that if the State by its gov g
lment failed to protect part Of her peo- b
J, or if she were unable to do it, if
archy prevailed, that failure on the part t
the State was a denial. The failure of e
, State is denial by the State. That was 4
!, understanding which we had of the | ?
rteenth and fifteenth amendments. c