The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-01-11
1 1S II A PARTY QUESTION 2

AS - "A 4 L1AsA llVN
The Pic. is wild In It's denunciation OF the
Democratic caucus, and OF the abuses to which
1t asserts that system Is subjected TO by the
Democrats Of the Legislature In the matter
Of the constitutional convention.
What the Pics own predictions or
opinions may be is matter OF no sort OF con-
sequence, but we decidedly protest against Its
looking over the list and selecting the most
respectable elements OF our population and
assuming to speak their sentiments as by
authority. In this instance It has cons tituted
itself the mouth-piece of the great financial,
commercial and trading classes" and assures
us that these are all opposed to the "costly
and entirely superfluous project Of constitu-
tional convention" The authority for this
assertion Is the memorial presented to the
last Legislature protesting against conven-
tion, In regard to which our contemporary
observes
The array Of signatures to the mem orial
against q convention, sent In last year, was
30 imposing as to silence all doubt or cavil
on this point. No evidence has been furn ished
that there has been any change on this point.
On the contrary, the reasons which existed
last year against calling convention have
been greatly strengthened.
Since that time many things have occurred.
and among them full, free and exhaustive
discussion of this whole question. The amplest
opportunity has been afforded this class, and
all other classes Of our people. OF giving ex-
preston to their views upon this subject.
A popular party convention has met at
Baton Rouge and made formal declaration
for constitutional convention, and that
declaration was embodied In the platform OF
the party by an overwhelming majority OF
the delegates from all portions Of the State,
ana 1t constituted the over shadowing issue
Of the last campaign. The PIC. even fastened
to put itself on record as enthusiastically In
sympathy with the popular heart. In its
Issue OF August z, commenting on the plat
form adopted by the Baton Rouge conven-
tion, that paper said:
Having from the first stronuously advo-
Gated the early call OF constitutional con-
ventiOD, we can but be grstlfled to find our
selves SO far In harmony with the represent
atives OF the Democratic and Conservative
party In Louisiana.
Five separate and distinct times has the
Pic. changed its attitude upon this one ques-
tion. With such record what influence can
Its utterances have with men Of convictions,
or what respectable element OF popular opin-
Ion can 1t assume to speak for?
But, with the above Endorsement OF the
Democrat platform on Its files, the PIC. de-
clares that the calling Of convention is not q
party question, and should not be treated by
party methods, and is doing all in Its power
to encourage bolt from the caucus.
II this not party question, we should like
to know what constitutes one. There has never
been party In this country that we have
ever heard Of that did not deal with constitu-
tional questions. and the strlctest and most
rigid party lines that have ever been drawn
have been on constitutional constructions 1t
Is not the subject matter OF the issue, then,
which removes 1t from party treatment.
In this instance the calling Of conven-
ton Is peculiarly party question. To be-
gin with, the Democrats OF this State have
never accepted the present constitution. On
the contrary. Immediately after It's adoption
In 1868, they made formal protest, as po-
lltlcal organization, against It's adoption and
declared 1t subversive Of all Democratic doc
trine or construction. From that time till
this there has never been political campaign
In this State In which that party has not SOL
ounly pieuBcu ltooil W CxsIl cOHV0ultOn anu
wipe the obnoxious instrument out Of exist
enoe. In the last campaign the Democratic
party determined to fulfill this pledge, and so
declared in the Baton Rouge platform. It has
been party question these many years, and
We see no reason why 1t should be otherwise
now. II those who are opposing convention
thought it was not such question, why did
they accept the Baton Rouge PLATFORM Why
did they go through the campaign on that
PLATFORM Why did they not raise that issue
in the organization Of the House and put up
an anti-convention candidate for Speaker In
opposition to Mr.. Moncure?
This is party question; and, were it not,
we should have grave mistrusts as to the
doctrines the convention might formulate
into fundamental law for this State.