The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1878-02-27

ieuSe, Dub IL IL q VlOlaLfOu VI tuc pc |
nal law, the crime of forgery. This
lis the crime Of which Anderson has
been convicted, and he bad to learn
for the first time that forgery was q
political ofense. His trial had been
a fair one in all respects, conducted
with all the formalities of law, and
he had been given the benefit of eve
ry presumption favorable to himself
that the law establishes, and the pre-
sumption must needs be that be had
been fairly convicted, and SO it would
remain until the contrary was proved,
and proven before the proper tribun-
al and by the methods the law
supplies.
IT was a matter that concerned the
people of Louisiana alone whether
they should bring her criminals to
justice. The people of no other
State has anything to do with it, and
any interference on their part or on
that of the Federal government with
the internal affairs of the State
would deserve and provoke nothing
but resentment as an lmpertinent
meddling. The case is with. the
courts and there it must be decided.
If Anderson has been convicted in
violation of the Constitution of the
United States, he has his remedies,
and these he must seek as other con
victed persons de, and no bargain
has ever been made to which be can
appeal to escape the just rewards of
his crime.
Governor Warmoth, in reply, said
that it had not been bis intention to
discuss the question, until it had
been reported upou by the Judiciary
COMMITTEES, but after what Mr.. Jonas
had said he felt called upon to state
the other side Of the question. If
there had been any agreement, as
charged, and he must say as was
generally believed, it should he OBJ
served. He believed that such agrse,
ments were as sacred as those be-
tween individuals. If it is true that
the Nichols government had pledged
itself to an amnesty for all past "po.
. litical conduct" and the acts with
which the members stood charged
were certainly political conduct" -
then breach Of faith had been com
mitted in their prosecution. He re.
5 membered the time when these reso
, lutions passed and the circumstances
, attending their passage. 1t was when
> the Packard government was in &C.
tual existence, and bloodshed and
violence were daily threatened. HI
understood that they had beer
. . drawn up by distinguished Demo
cratic member of Congress-, and tina
81 their purpose had been to assure tn,
D supporters of the Packard govern
. ment and the people Of the oountr,
that there should be no persecution
I for the political conduct of the oppo
# nents Of the Nichols government
It could not be possible that the.
were meant simply as deception t.
!, get those persons into the power O
the Nichols, government with tn
= deliberate purpose of violating tn
:, pledges they contain. These resolu
tions were as much the law of thi
, State as was the statute making fol
gerry crime, which the gentlema
says was violated. And what doe
!. this law say? 1t pledges in tn
plainest terms that the Nichols gov
y eminent would discountenanoe q
prosecutions for past political cor
duct. If it does not cover these Ct
= ses, what does it mean-what pract
cal effect does it havep
Does it simply mean that Reput
licans would be allowed to live
they renamed in Louisiana; ths
: they should not be killed for haviu
, been members Of the Republics
:. party2 No, it meant no such mol
= sense. 1t meant that all the suppo
). tiers of the Packard governmer
should be assured immunity again.
, fprosecution for all political offense
committed by them. Yes, and th
: was the construction put upon it b
u the Democratic press and member
- Of the Legislature at the time. tt
. Returning Board was nothing to hin
= but he did believe in standing up
- "bargains"-if you will. Four gran
- juries had sat, and yet no indie
ments had been found against the.
=, men. The fifth sat and refused
indict them. But as soon as it Al