The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-06-12
SHALL We HAVE WARP

denCe. This fE In our opinion, q radical errO
The question Is too broad and deep to be oil
cussed or decided upon such ground
Mr.. Webster, In his celebrated letter to th
Barring Brothers, which has been frequentl
quoted In these columns. has stated the trt1
and only authority which can define and settl
the debt OF State, and we suggest that til
discussion heneeforth be broadened to cove
g the true issue involved.
The question is one purely and simply Q
State policy and honor, as are all question
which depend upon the determination of
sovereignty. Decisions Of courts here amour
to nothing. The courts are the mere creature
Of the sovereignty, and 1t is US absurd to holt
. that Louisiana can be held or bound Id TIL
1t would be to declare that the Court Of CASA
tion can determine an issue between Franc
and England.
When the advocates Of the sacredness of tn,
debt dis 1t stands assume that the obligations
OF the State may be enforced by judicial pro
cesses, they iniure their cause and render
an equitable settlement more difficult: anC
when the repudationists ignore the high ant
solemn duty OF the State to preserve It's
honor untarnished and the chivalry OF its
sovereignty irreproachahle, they drag us into
evils which 1t Is impossible to portray.
We hold to the broadcast doctrine Of State
sovereignty; we hold that no court, State OF
Federal, can attack the action of the State
we hold that, except as to the powers she has
delegated to the Federal government In the
constitution, Louisiana IL like England,
France or Austria sovereign. And 1t Is be-
cause she holds this high position that she
should sacrifice much rather than do an act
of wrong or injustice for which she cannot be
held legally responsible
But this exalted position of sovereignty,
though 1t exempts the State from the pro-
cesses Of courts, In the nature OF things sub
iects her to more terrible consequences for the
violation Of plighted faith. We reject the
idea that the funding act and the amendment
OF 1874 was mere vulgar contract such as
is made between man and man. We do
not concede that the State OF Louisiana
would or could make or be bound BY an ordi-
binary commercial contract. But we cannot
escape the alternative that that act and
amendment subsequently ratified and accepted
By the government elected By her people and by
her highest court constitutes sort of treaty
or pledge, upon which the holders Of her secu-
rifles have relied and invested their money.
and that If she violates it she may reasonably
expect to meet with such hostilities as 1t may
be practicable to inaugurate against her.
1t is not likely that armies will invade her
territory, or that navies will blockade her
ports. But none the less she will incur the
responsibility Of violating her pledged faith
A r., Ey.r%v Al
drawn from the m erchants, planters and bank
ers; all her interests will be injured and thou
sands of working men thrown out of employ
ment. This would be certainly an act OF war,
yet 1t would be the least Injurious. In the
course OF time the salubrity OF our climate
and the wonderful fertility Of our lands might
tempt capital to return to us. But will we
ever be able to resist or remedy the fiercer
measures which must be imposed upon US by
the war that population will provoke
There Is not an Intelligent man in the coun-
try who does not know that great move
ment for the destruction OF the States and
the Capitalization ofpower In Washington Is |
on foot So powerful and audaclous is that
that 1t reversed the last Presiden-
tial election, and now overawes the Demo-
cratic majority In both houses OF Congress.
The war against the sovereignty Of the States
Is already instituted. The rattle Of mus
kerry, the thunder of cannon and the bursting |
OF shells are not yet heard; but the hosts are |
and the strategetical movements |
are going on. The hostile forces only want |
cause, or, let us say, an excuse, to declare the
war and proceed to extinguish the last yestige
Of the sovereignty Of the States. Mr. Blaine,
we are told, is already making up list Of the
States and an estimate of the
so-called obligations, with view of basing
On them this declaration Of war.
In view OF these facts would 1t not be well
for the Convention to pause, listen to reason
and consent to reasonable adjustment of the
debt with the bondholders? God knows We
do not write these words as q threat. We
simply state the responsibility the State will
incur by reputation; we state 1t from the
highest standpoint Of the gentlemen who
claim the right Of the State to repudiate, and
we state 1t as a warning to our people, In view
Of the movement, obvious to all sensible men,
now on foot to annihilate the sovereignty of
The States.
By the course proposed by the majority re-
port Of the committee on the State debt, the
taxpayers may be relieved one or two mills
taxation. But will that compensate for the
evils of the war 1t will provoke upon our COM
mercial and agricultural interests, and our
political institutions? This Is the question to
be determined We deny the existence Of any
legitimate power to arraign this State before
the courts. But the right to declare and
make war exists everywhere and even mayb
made as effectual by the methods we have
described as by armies and navies. Will 1t
pay Louisiana to provoke this war?
Will It pay her to Danish capital
from her borders? VIII it pay her
to destroy six millions Of property Of her
own citizens? Will it pay her to afford a cause
or an excuse to the enemies of the constitu-
ton and the republic to justify their pro-
gramme Of revolution and war upon the re-
public for the purpose OF establishing an oil
yarchy Of the money power? The regulators
. the Convention, we think need feel no ap-