New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1877-03-23

| as e6ulC-Reter, "teenkS 70 G0d ana tn9
good wine, which stands in his masters
way, "strikes down his master" The
latter, to save his life, Confesses his
treason" and the King logically cries
out:
| 60 take hence that traitor from my rightl
For by his death do perceive his guilt
He then, instead of attributing the judg-
ment to Providence, proceeds to compen-
safe the sand bag gladiator, saying:
| Come. fellow, f,llow us for thy reward.
A later and more practical theology has
determined that Providence sides with
the strongest battalions, while modern
civilization has appointed constitutions,
laws, Judiciary and an Electoral Com
mission as the umpire by which questions
of personal and political right are deter
mined. The Democracy proposes to re-
turn to the t'wager of battelr to decide
whether Mr.. Packard or Mr.. Nichols is
Governor of Louisiana. One would sup
pose they would not except to the United
States as combatant, but would go in
with the same faith in Providence against
Sheridan or Sherman that Peter manifest
ed against his superior. The Democracy
of Ohio have recently intimated dis
trust of Providence, and the Democracy
of Louisiana are even more skeptical.
They will not leave the question of right
to combat with power stronger than
themselves. They even expressly stipu-
late that the only power which could
guarantee a fair fight should leave the
country.
They even consider it entirely unfair
that the supreme authority shall preside
at this "wager of battell, as it did at the
one above cited. If, as in the somewhat
celebrated case Of Goliath for, etc. against
David, the Horatii and Curatii, and other
leading authorities, each side should
choose champion, what would the De-
mocracy say to arming the leaders on this
State question with bowie knives, the
nearest equal weapons known, and setting
them to sacrifice to save the blood of
thousands 1t would be at once pro-
tested that Mr.. Packard was man of I'M
doubted courage and unusual personal
strength, while Mr.. Nichols, though also
brave man, was SO infrm as to make
such fight suicide of himself and the
cause confded to him. For ourselves,
believing in the laws, and not in the
superstitious interpretations of Provi-
dence, we would scorn and spurn such
shameful test, or any derivation of title
under it. Yet comparison between the
military force of the Republicans and
Democrats will show an indisputabIe SUI
periority in the soldiery of the Democracy.
If it were not for that superiority the De-
mocracy would not propose to decide the
dispute on the field of battle. That they
demand this advantage is proven, first,
by their fear to fight those stronger than
themselves; and, secondly, by the demand
that the stronger and umpire force shall
} be Withdrawn, leaving them to contend
} with those who do not pretend to be their
military equals.
1t is q singular construction of the right
} of suffrage that it must be accompanied
with the military ability to protect its
own exercise. Suffrage was intended to
substitute force. 1t has been intro
duced as means of protecting the weak,
the unskilled and the undrilled from the
stronger. It las been established by
wars Of independence, in order that Alex
ander Stephens alone on his crutches
may approach the polls and offset the
vote of John Morrissey, supported by his
escort and cohort of slungshot roughs. We
have no doubt if the qualification of mill
tary ability had been imposed on the gift
Of suffrage the colored people would have
hesitated to accept the deadly gift. Had
those who advocated manhood suffrage"
imagined the terrible consequences aud the
practical nullifcation of its exercise, they
would in humanity have hesitated before
they conferred the right until they had
secured some guarantee from the Democ-
racy that the colored people would be
permitted to enjoy it. The gift of suf-
frsge, however, to the colored race was ac-
companied with similar gift to those
who had been disfranc hised by the results
of the war.
1t was futile expectation on the part
of the Republicans that the suffrage Of
emancipation and the suffrage of amnesty
would accompany each other and that the
one would be a surety upon the recog-
nizance Of the other. They now propose
to decide the right Of the colored people
by referring the question to the field Of
battle. We trust no such decision will be
permitted, but were it possible that the
Federal government should accept the de-
mand Of the Democracy, desperation and
a determination not to surrender their
rights without struggle would have de-
manded from The Republicans the best re-
sistance which was in their power.
RECEDIEa HOPES.
| When President Hayes announced a
/ tsci...tl.1...t