The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-06-22
OUACHITA PARISH,
THE CONVENTION QUESTION.
How Minority of AntI-COBventionites
Carried their Point Against a
Majority of The People,
MoNRoE, La., JUNG 10, 1s78.

MONROE, La, June 10, 1878.
Editor Democrat a late issue Of your
valuable journ u, notice paragraph In re-
lation to the proceedings of the recent Parish
Convention, calculated to mslead the public
as to the stand Ouachita takes on the consti-
tutional convention question, and the influ-
enee Of Senator Stubbs in this community
1t is true, as you state, that the Parish Con-
vention, by majority of fifteen votes AS to
3O), adopted resolutions, declaring 1t inexpe~
dent to call the convention at any day in the
early future. It is also true that resolutions
approving the legislative course of Senator
Stubbs were adopted. But that these resolu-
tions are expressive of the will OF the majority
Of the Democrats of Ouachtta, deny.
A simple statement of facts will show you
that q majority of the UOtes Of The people OF
this parish were for the convention. There
were seven wards to be represented In the
parish convention, with votes as follows:
FIRST ward, IA votes; second ward, IA votess
third ward, IA votes; fourth ward, votes:
fifth ward, votes; sixth ward, votes, and
seventh ward, IL votes At the election for
delegates In the first ward the vote stood 28
for convention, against; In the second ward
III for convention, none against; i'm the third
ward 76 for, 81 against III we consider the
vote on giving the chair authority 10 appoint
delegates as test Of the Convention fIues-
tion)i In the fourth ward for, Is against; In
me flIth WaTd 23 for, none against; in the
sixth ward the question was never put to the
meeting, but give all present t12) against; in
the seventh ward 20 for, 29 against. Add up the
vote for and against, as above stated, and we
nave l8l Tor convention and 1873 against, be-
ing majority Of 43 for In q vote Of $40.
These figures defy any man to successfully
contradict
You will perceive there was very slim vote
everywhere but in ward three, and am safe
in asserting that those opposed to the con-
vention brought out their full strength. The
people were In this manner defrauded OF an
expression OF their will by few votes In eer-
tam wards These few votes, although but an
insignificant part Of the whole vote OF the par
ish, chose enough delegates TO control the con-
ventiOn and pass the resolutions.
There Is also misstatement in the minutes
OF the convention as to the number of votes
against making the resolutions unanimous
The same vote was cast against making them
unanimous as against their adoption The
error perhaps came about in this wise: Those
voting against making the resolutions unani-
nous were told to stand I'D, and twelve stood
up. These were counted as twelve votes
against the motion, when the delegates thus
voting cast thirty votes.
There was an effort made by the minority
OF the committee on resolutions to refer the
matter back to the parish at large, to be voted
on IN the primary election. This, OF course
was opposed by the supporters Of Senator
SCuDDS, VINO were In the majority, and who
were well acquainted with the real feelings Of
the people Of this parish, as shown BY their
votes as above stated. 1t must appear to
every reasoning man that the sense OF the
parish could only be taken in q vote of the
whole parish as q WHOLE and not by wards.
The opponents Of the convention and Support
ers OF the constitution Of 1868 did not desire To
take the sense Of the parish Their whole
course in this parish has shown that they re-
lied upon sharp practice and shutting tricks
to stifie the voice ofthe people and make them
appear TO give utterance to sentiments most
odious to them. These perpetrators of Radi~
cal infamy and oppression have succeeded in
their views here, but hope there is enough
patriotism still in Louisiana to redeem her.
PARTICIPATOR,