The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1877-04-09
The New Orleans Meeting.

The New Orleans MeeClng.
THOMAS JsrrERSoN'S Declaration OF Inde-
nendeuce is not more carefully. drawn
document than the resolutions passed at
the New Orleans meeting last Friday night.
Gsoges MAsoS's Bill Of Rights does not
more exactly express the meaning OF us
au,hor. Its model paper in these respects.
The only question that any one can reason
ably raise in reading 1t Is ~ to whether IL
was prudent to declare the set purpose OF
the peonle OF Louisiana not to submit 10 ''ic
government OF PACKARD. That tn's Is .ho''
fixed and steady purpose. we nave no' io'
manv months doubted. Was wise 20 HAM
il known to all the world: :,
Tho neop,e Of New Orleans have started
in path which they ,ntcnd'to pursue W
the end. They have submitted 10 unjust
rule until submission has ceased 10 pc VII
mo Their manhood forbids that they
should longer abase themselves III the ons''
L. is shameful thing that they should nave
had 70 sacrifice their pride so far as to make
this protest 10 the northern people, VINO
have nothing in the world to DO with the
internal affairs Of the southern STATES.
7, is humiliatins to all southern men
"a reflect that n so-called free govern
mont has so few OF the clements OF
trnc liberty in its composition that en-
hchtcned Christian men Of the nob!cSt race
on earth. and having the highest character
is,ics OF that race most largely developed
in themselves, should be reduced to such
st,te of vassalaee as that they must ask OF
strangers permission to conduct the geV-
ornn,ont of their own State undSturbed by
extraneouS influences. 1t shows how Ear
the present administrators Of the Govern
mens have wandered from the path IN
which the founders OF il found peace,
happineSs, security, and perfect freedom.
We say it is Notifying to southern man
to reflect upon these things. It ought to be
equally Notifying to northern man. ONO
might as Justly be called upon 10 explain "a
Louisiana why she ordered out her militia
last vear as Louisiana to explain to ONO
why she will not allow PACKARD TO rule
over her. There cannot be one rule Tor the
North and another for the South. "Iht
whole Union must either be slave or free. .
said MIR. SEWARD in his day: and it is Just as
true now. What is constitutional. Interior:
ence in the case of Louisiana would be
ave, and ,riW DEMONSTRATIONS interference
in the case OF Massachusetts. The southern
people are fighting the battle oi the entire
Union.
We are sorry to lie compelled to acknow.
ledge that Mr.. HAYES is so rooted and
grounded in the consolitlationist doctrine OF
the northern section OF the Union-the
STORY doctrine-that he is not likely 10 I'M
derStand or appreciate the feelings which
moved the people OF Louisiana TO give ut
terance to the words OF which we arc
speaking. Indeed, we fad TOO many here
in Richmond who see no occasion at all fol
the vigorous protest. of the people OF
Louisiana, and who consider it impru-
dent to harbor doubt. and treason
TO express it, as to Mr.. HAyEs's states
manship Such persons see no harm at
all in allowing the President to send inquis-
itorial commissions to the several southern
States: still less in his stationing troops in
them "to preserve the pcace"; and still
less in his deciding at his leisure whether
he will or will not withdraw the troops and
allow the people OF Louisiana to govern
themselves in their own way. On this last
position the battle @, freedom is to be fought.
II the President has the right to choose
to decide whether he will or will not
keep his soldiers in Richmond to "pre-
serve the peace, ito decide whether the
army may or may not be employed to keep
O mayor or Governor in Office, as General
GRANT did when be kept his soldiers standing
guard at the several station-heuseS in this
city-then the New Orleans meeting was
blunder. The down-trodden people there
ought to keep still. tits not for them butfor
the President to decide whether the army is
or Is not needed in Louisiana. 1t is not for
them TO say whether PACKARD shall be Gov
ernor or not. The right to make this de-
sision belongs to the monarch at Washing
ton. 1t is not for them to protest. They
are his Maiesty's subjects, and ought to be
loyal 1t is not for their Governor nor their
Legislature to say when troops are needed
IN that State to put down domestic violence,
though the Constitution plainly says it is
their province to decide this question. In
o word, free government and home rule can
exist together, but free government and
rule from Washington are az antaSonistic as
virtue and vice.
lnterviev with Ran Tucker