Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1878-08-29
Washington Correspondence.
WAsHINGT6N, Aug. p, 1875

up my correspondence since the last
of June, and when Congress is not in
session there is but little transpirine
here that is Of sufficient importance
to write about One of the most i'm
| portant events that has lately taken
place is the conflict Of authority be-
! tween the United States officers and
the State Officers of South Carolina,
as it shows most clearly that the doc
trine Of State rights is still held para
/ mount to the rights Of the United
States Government Notwithstanding
the failure Of the South in the late
rebellion, which was based and sus-
tanned by the South wholly upon this
false doctrine. As between the loyal
citizen and the southern devotee this
case is viewed and discussed from two
different stand points--from that Of a
state which which sets up States SOW
ereignty as superior to the General
Government and the proper enforce
ment of its laws in that State, on the
one hand, and from the side of United
States authority, which is using all
proper agencies to enforce its own
revenue laws, and out of which has
arisen a case over which collision of
authority has arisen. Let the loyal
citizen look at this case as presenttd
| by the Charleston, South Carolina,
NerS: ''The revenue officers were in
"search of Redmond. and supposed
chin to be in the house Of Amos Ladd.
They charged upon the house with
earns in their hands. Amos Ladd
standing upon the threshold of his
''house, snapped his gun at the officers
''as they charged upon him. The
''officers fired at him and killed him.
"They had no warrant for his arrest.
They had no right to invade his
''house Had he been charged with
''illicit distilling there would have
''been no justification for killing an
''unarmed man. There was no gang;
there was no attack by 'moonshin-
GERS; there was no shooting by the
officers in self defence The Ma
tlonal Republican says, 1.-The NerS
presents the case as fairly as it could
from its own standpoint, but most
certainly not as fairly and truthfully
as it should The facts as admitted,
except where evasion or peryersion
intervene, show the case of the Gov
eminent sufficiently clear to disarm
it of the charge of murder The
Revenue officers we're in the line of
duty armed with Federal authority to
arrest illicit distillers and suppress
Illicit distilling. They had reason to
think that Ladd was connected with
the violations of the law, and APP
preached his house to satisfy them
selves as to the just ground of their
suspicion. He appeared on the
threshold of his door and confronted
the officers with arms IN his hands.
They approached him and he snapped
his gun at them for the purpose OF
killing them They returned his at
tempted fire before he could fire again
and he was killed, This is the affair
in a nutshell, as admitted substantially
by the NeWs and is the make up Of the
United States. The State authorities
step in, arrest these officers on charge
Of murder, throw them into prison
and substantially set the laws and au-
thority Of the General Government at
defiance. and proceed to wreak ven
geance under this spirit upon the
United States through its officers and
agents, who had used no more force
than was necessary to execute the
laws and defend themselves and their
lives against armed resistance. If
Ladd was an innocent, law abiding
and order-loving citizen he would not
have met the ministers of the law
with arms in his hands and with an
attempt to kill them when they were
only approaching his residence in the
strict line of duty. Under the ad-
mitted facts of the Ne,0S there was no
murder intended, neither was there
any perpetrated, and if the case were
reversed South Carolina would be the
first and loudest to commend the ac-
ton of the officers under the circum-
stances. But the affair affords pre-
text for setting up State sovereignty
over the laws and jurisdiction of the
! United States in the South, and multi
tication steps to the front with much
boldness and offensiveness. The duty
of the General Government is plain
1t should act deliberately, but with a
decision and frmness of purpose which
will assert its sovereignty and integri