New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-09-06
THEY DON'T KNOW THE LAW.

| ooeoAAoAOu d. IAo AOICc Huu SAe0AS "a Va
Federal law for preserving the public
peace and suppressing local instructions
We first saw the Secretary of War issu'
his instructions to the General OF the
army to execute the laws. Then comes
now the explanation Of the Attorney
General of the United States of what the
law is and how it is to be applied. The
REPUBLICAN, at the date Of the disturb
ance Of fourteenth of September, 1874
reviewed the laws of Congress on the sub
ject. It was explained that during the
war, while the Southern States were con.
tending for the paramount sovereignty
Of the State over its own inhabitants, the
| Federal government was contending for
exactly the opposite doctrine. Before the
war the State had exclusive jurisdic-
| ton over its own territory, nor
could the Federal government have
interviewed in any disturbance within a
State unless upon the call of the State
| authorities. During the war the authori-
ty Of several State governments was in
hands hostile to the Federal government,
and SO no appeal to suppress such an in
surrectionary disturbance could or would
be had to the Federal government by
such State authorities. Congress, there
fore, enacted that whenever by reason
of unlawful distractions against the au-
thority of the United States it becomes
impracticable in the judgment of the
President of the United States to enforce
by ordinary course of judicial proceed
ings the laws Of the United States within
every State or Territory, it shall be law
full for the President to call forth the
militia of any or of all the States, and to
employ such parts Of the land and
naval forces Of the United States as he
may deem necessary to enforce the
faithful execution of the laws of the
United States. But this law goes good
deal further. 1t prescribes that when
ever, in any part of State, the laws of
the United States can not be executed, by
reason Of resistance or evasion, the Presi-
dent may declare such district in insur-
rection against the United States
And thereupon all commercial inter-
course between the citizens of such district
and the citizens of tbs rest of the United
States shall cease and be unlawful, 80 long
as such condition of hostility stall continue,
and all goods and chattels, wares and mer-
coming from such insurreation.
ary district into other parts of the United
States, or proceeding by land or water
such district, shall, together with the vessel
or vehicle carrying the same, or conveying
pers Ons to or from such insurrectiOnarv dis.
trict, be forfeited to the United States.
Such are the laws which the Demo-
cratic Mr.. Lord was of opinion should |
De executed by the President and |
he Democratic House of Representatives
embodied their opinion in the resolution
which it adopted. We would advise our
Democratic contemporaries to read this
aw with its twenty-six sections before
hey reproach the President with having
his purpose to execute the
aw. They will find that this act assert
ng the supremacy of the Federal govern
lent-passed in the midst of the war
J strong enough to crafty the animosities
the direst enemy of State rights.
resident Grant has been one of the
lost generous and conciliatory men in
ar and in peace, but were he the vim
lctive ruler, that many of those who owe
leir rights to his amnesty, proclaim him
} be, he would find enough in the laws
J they exist, to authorize any extent Of
ederal authority. We will give one e1-
nple. Suppose it be impossible to ex-
ute the Federal laws in district of
or Louisiana? The President
ould be authorized by the law to pro-
bit all commercial intercourse between
oh district and the rest of the United
ates. In what condition would be the
ops of such district? How would the
liens receive merchandise or even a
all? The law authorizes the absolute
ockade of such districts.
With such a declaration of Federal su- a
emacy upon the statute book we have
en- surprised that the Democratic major Z
; in the House of Representatives have 1
t repealed those provisions which are :
noxious to them. Why have Mr.. Ellis t
d his Democratic associates returned v
complain of the President for executing P
} laws? These gentlemen and their Dem a
ATTIC associates knew the duties imposed G
the President. Were the Northern a
afraid to resist the supremacy P
the nation? Were the sixty-one Confed- Il
tie officers in Congress, Of whom Mr.. u
rtield speaks, unable of themselves to Il
zeal these provisions? Let them come &c
and answer to their State rights con- al
uents ,chy they did not repeal these u
visions of which they now complain. d
We have left the Democracy to choose d
ween absolute ignorance of the law, II
the AFFECT acquiescence Of their repre- N
tatives in law, with the execution of
which they are unwilling to trust the -,
'sident Of the United States. We ~
lily can not expect our Democratic con- -,
lporaries to give up any little advan- y.
e to be derived from local prejudice, ~
if they would only read the law it ~. 40
int save them the injustice of con- =.
lning the President for obeying the ~,
, and authorize them to demand of
If representatives in Congress why -
I, J11 ;, ~ yoc& ~ <bn J,+xv &c A. D.: ~