New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1877-04-14
ThR LouIalANA oAsR.
70 .Isa sIaass i, lawrence and others. q shs Com.

y OtAoAN,
In the briet signed BY Messrs. ssmmes !.
| Campbell and Miller, In behalf Of the Nioh-
oils so-called government, stntementa are
made which are not acenrato. and which
may mislead. propose, therefore, briefly
to direct attention to them,
They state "the Dorr case, in l842, is To-
tally different from that of the Louieianne Y
1t is trne the circumstances which gave rfse
| to the conflict between the two parties IA
Rhode Island were different from those
| which cause the conflict In Louisiana, huts
in reality, the principle involved In tho iva
cases is the same. In both cases. one party
asserts "there is no power on earth author
lied to intervene between the people and
the persons selected ag the ballot boxes as
| their representatives" while the other party
| maintains that this right of the people =
regulated by established law, which can
not be ignored even by the people; that it
is the duty Of the general governments ts
protect the lascfsal government against do
| meetic violence or iDsurrecti0n.
In the brief it is asserted that the election
law of 1872 is, in 60 far as it establishes q
Returning Board for all elections, Ia direct
violation OF the State cOnstitution.n But theE
fail to indicate wherein the said law CON
\ ficts with article f0rty-six, thrty-four or
forty-eight of the constitution which they
cite; and maintain that the Law is not il
conflict with any one of those articles.
Article forty-aix requires 1.-THE returns Of all
elections for members Of the General As
sembly to be made TO the Secretary Of
State" Section two of the election law de-
olares, lone copy of such returne they ehalA
tilein the office of the Secretary Of State;n
and section forty four directs the Secretary
of State to tranemit to the Clerk Of the
House of Representatives and ike Secretary
of the Senate Of the last General Assembly
/ list of the persons IS, according to the
g zeturns, shall have been elected 70 either
branch Of the Legislature And the same
section expressly states that s'n0thing in
this act shall be construed to conflict with
article thirty-fOur of the constitution Of the.
State" -es eas
Article thirty-f0Er provides that "each
house Of the General Assembly shall be,
the judge Of the qualification, election and
returns of its members"
Article forty-eight declares that "the re-
turns of every election shall be sealed up
and transmitted by the proper returning
officer to the Secretary Of State, who shall
deliver them to the Speaker Of the House
of Representatives on the second day of
the session of the General Assembly then
to be h0lden," etc.
There is certainly nothing in any of these
provisions of the constitution which pre-
vents the General Assembly from declar-
ing who shall be the returning officers of
the etRte for all elections. This the Legis-
lature has done in section two of the act
Of 1872.
| WnhteNer OOIeSlAOn9 may Do ulkou
| against the wisdom or policy of investing
those returning officers with the powers
they have, they can NOT Affect the oonstitu-
tionality of the law. Indeed, article l03 Of
the constitution made it the duty of the
General Assembly to enact some such laW
as the election law of 1872
It declares 'the privilege of free suffrage
shall be protected by laws regulating and
prohibiting, under adequate penalties, all
undue influence therein. from power,
bribery, tumult or other improper prac-
tice" This vested discretion in the Leg
islature, for the exercise whereof they alone
are responsible. The law in question was,
signed and promulgated in November,
1872 at the instance of Democrats, and, it
is believed, on the advice of at least one of
the attorneys who signed the brief for the
Nichols party.
The General Assembly has been organ
lied, under the acts of 1870 and 1872, since
their adoption, without question as to the
constitutionality of said laws Besides, it
ia the settled jurisprudence of the United
States and of this State, that law will
never be declared unconstitutional, If there
be reasonable doubt about its unconstitu-
tiOnality.
Bat if it were conceded that the law
were in any manner unconstitutional, how
would that benefit Mr.. Nichols or his
cOurtsl
The only returns Of elections made TO the
Secretary OF State by anybody, were those
, which were transmitted to the General As
|, sembly, convening at the State House, and
which declared Mr.. Packard elected Gov
ernOr of the State, and whose Senate con.
frmed Ludeling, Leonard King and Du-
! PLANTER. The Nichols Legislature had ne
official returns whatever. They have as
/ sumed to organize outaide Of the law and
the constitution.
: The constitutiOnality of the law has
never been questioned in any of the numeE-
ous cases before the Supreme Court Of this
/ Ssate-it Is fair to presume this was because
! it was generally conceded TO be oOnHtitu-
: tiOnal-but the right of the returning
officers to act under said law has often
! been recognized by the Supreme Court Of
! this State, and the legality of its provisions,
relating to the organization of the General
Assembly was held in the case Of Morgan
We. KennArd, 25 An.
a The constituiienality Of the cot Of 1872
5 was expressly decided by the Electoral
3 Commission. But law Is presumed TO be
J constitutional until declared uno0nHtitu-
6 tional.
8 The position that the acceptanos of
Ludeling and Leonar1 Of q new commits
sion from K-llogg operated q surrender Of
j, their former commissions e unsound and
Hnreasonable-no one is presumed to give
: away highland, if one, having . titles
: acquires another, whether good or bad
: : surely he does not thereby weaken bis for
J mer title. If the Senate, which confirmed
= | them, be not the lawful c5nHtes tn1M Eutf
2 hold over under article l22 Of the constitu-
: ton.
It is stated in the brief, sNo other court
|. j is frequentsd by lawyers or people; Indeed
the existence Of any other eupremo Cour,
! is unknown"
= The truth is, the court appointed by Ksi.
= logg met on the ninth Of January, 1877, and
Z the usual number Of Lawyers and people,
attended and recognised the eOurt
I, But on that day the court buildinRu and
records were forcibly seizsd by an armed
I mob, who still hold possession Of the build
J. ing The lawful justices Of the S1pneme
: : Court have isaued An order to the eherih e
4 retake the records and building ard the5
rely upon the lawful executive Of the STATE
!, to execute the order, with the nasiatrnes q
! the general government, il the inanKreatinn
8 ary forOe be too powerful 20 be- otherElas
= overcome.
Y II il to Be seen whether revolution E III tl
Y recognized and encouraged Within 4i4t<
= by tie United States.
u JOHN r LUDELINc.
4 The American Society Of Civil Eaglna
(. viii maat in this city On the tneate. fnr