Alpena weekly argus. [volume] (Alpena, Mich.) 1871-1893, 1877-04-11

Il il not eesy 10 compare the let
ter and instructions as It would be
IL the latter were couched in the
plain and simple language OF the
former instead OF the interminable
sentences for which the Secretary
Of State has become notorious. 1t
IL possible, however, with some ex-
ertion to extract from the involved
and intricate phraseology q passa-
bly, clear idea OF the meaning en-
Folded therein; and when this is
done il will be seen that We are
correct in the assertion that the
letter antagonizes the instructions
at every important point. In the
letter. for example, Hayes declares
that finding a detachment Of United
States infantry in Columbia, by or
der of his predecessor, he has de-
layed decision AZ to their removal
until he could consider and deter
mine whether the condition of az
fairs in the State Ia such as to re-
quire or Justify continued military
occupations OF the State House. He
then proceeds to assert that, in his
opinion, ''there does not now exist
in that State such domestic vio-
lence as is contemplated by the
Constitution as the ground upon
which the military power Of the
national government may he in
voked for the defense Of a State"
There sre disputes. he adds, "but
these are to he settled, not by the
Executive of tie United States,
but by sach orderly and peaceful
methods Is may be provided by the
Constitution and the law Of the
State" Mark how differently a
precisely similar case is treated in
fhe inst~ic,ions In Louisiana,
HAYES fsanh apparent military
Intervention" legacy from his
predecessor. Instead, however, of
deciding promptly, as in the South
Carolina case, whether actual do
nestle violeesce exists, he finds il
his dnty ~tc examine and deter
mine the real extent, form and
effect to which such intervention
actually exists, and to decide "a to
the time, manner and conditions
which should he observed in put
ting an end of it" II is to aid him
in the performance Of this duty
which he performed entirely IN
aided IN the case Of Sonth Carolina
that he wants q commission and
the manper in which the commits
sion is to aid him is by an examin-
alton, conducted In Louisiana, and
the collection of "infcrnation that
may be pertinent to the circum-
spection and security Of any meas
ures he may resolve upon"
But it is not alone in the method
of solving the vexed questions that
the cases Of South Carolina and
Louisiana differ, it is in the ques-
tons themselves. In South Caro-
lima, as has been shown, all that
Hayes wanted to know was wheth-
er there was any such domestic
violence as the Constitution con-
templates; and II the commission
were formed SIMPLY to decide that
question for him In respect TO
Louisiana there might be some ex-
cuse for II. But the commission
is not formed for any such purpose.
Struggling through Evart's ver-
bisge we find that the duty i'm
posed on the commission is to find
out "what are the real impediments
to regular, legal and peaceful pro-
cedure under the laws and Consti-
tutscn a the State Of Louisiana.
Nor are taese inpediments to be
found for the the purpose Of en-
aiding Hayes to decide anything
though Evarts says ne wants to
know what they sre-but because
Hayes confidently expects that the
discovery of them ~woaM Indicate
to the people Of that State louis
iana) the wisdom cf their removal"
In other words, the commission
goes to find ont what ais the Louis
lana people so as to tell Hayes,
who in turn will tell the people Of
Louisiana, in the hope that the
latter will hit upon some method Of
cure. And until this Is done Hayes
proposes TO continue the military
interference which he has discon-
tinced In South Carolina on the
ground that he has no right TO con-