The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1877-08-22
THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVEN-
TION AGAIN.

lHE CVNS lEUNaL CVNvEN.
TI0N AGAIN.
Our article upon this subject of
week before the last has given UNI
bragg to The Daily City Item, and
necessitates our referring to the ques-
ton again. We accord the Item the
utmost freedom Of opinion in the
matter, and the perfect right to differ
with us-nay, even to criticise our
opinions as expressed in the article
referred to; but it has gone outside
of the range of legitimate criticism,
and seen fit to impugn OF motives
in opposing the call of Convention
to frame new Constitution entire.
We have no desire or inclination to
enter into war of words with the
Item, as we fear that it's recent ex-
perience with the Times has ''got its
hand in" and that it would have the
advantage of US in that species Of
choice literature, that seeks rather to
smear an opponent with slime than
to answer arguments fairly stated.
We were discussing the merits of the
question without reference to the ex-
istence of the Item, and indeed with
out a thought as to what might be
its opinion. In fact we had entirely
forgotten that there was such pa
per, so-called, in New Orleans, or we
would have taken the precautlon to
ask permission to give utterance to
an opinion different from the one en-
tertained by it. We are terribly
"cut up'' by its insinuation that our
editorial was inspired by Mat. Wells,
and when we reflect upon the rela.
tions existing between the President
of the Returning Board and ourselves,
and consider that we are as friendly
as oil and water, and meet together
in the friendly intercourse held by
fire and powder, we are amazed at
the astuteness of the Item, and par
ticularly when we presume heis anx
for US to make such a mistake. We
will follow the example set US by the
law, which does not care for small
things and dismiss the Item with
the maxim "De mi,sina,.s," DO.
The New Orleans Democrat has
very suitable editorial on the subject
in it's issue of the 18th inst, in which
it concludes at least that the ques-
tion of calling Convention or sub.
hitting the necessary amendments to
a popular vote, or as it says "the
mode Of effecting these changes is
Gan open question, which should be
wisely and carefully considered, and
calmly discussed" We propose to
discuss it calmly and on mature re-
Election are more than ever convinced
that at this time it is not to the in
terest of the people of this State to
hold a Constitutional Convention.
We have no doubts that all the
''outs'' would like new deal so as to
give them a chance, slim as it would
be, to get Sin" to Office, but we do
not propose to consider their inter-
ests. We look entirely to the well
fare of the substantial people of the
country who have had more than
enough of elections, and want an op-
portunity to quietly pursue their av-
ocations apart from the turmoil, the
divisions and discussions that inva-
riably attend a canvass and election
in this State.
We are no apologist for either the
men who made the Constitution Of
1868, or of the Constitution made by
them. There are some changes We
would like to see made in it, but We
think all the necessary changes car
be made in the shape of Amend
ments submitted to a vote at the
election to be held in November 1878
For instance Article Is rexuires the
Legislature to provide for the regis
tration of voters. We would lik'
to see that repealed. 1t can be dom
by the Legislature submitting to
vote this proposition: Shall Articl
Is of the State Constitution be abol
, ished9 and the ballots would be "Fo
Abolition" against Abolition.
r Article 1872 requiring all lands sol
by judicial process to be divided int
r lots of from ten to fifty acres shoul'
, be abolished. The Judicial District
!, should be changed, and many of ther
: abolished, but this is in the power 9
3 the Legislature under Article 80 c
e the Constitution.
8 As the New Orleans Democrs