The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-06-14
THE NEW ORLEANS DEMOCRAT, SATURDAY JUN II '779.

i ~
Much has been said and more written about
| fraud In connection with this debt, and what
is the result OF the investigation The Issue
Of Chattanooga Railroad bonds only has been
pronounced fraudulent. Surely there could
be no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion,
since the Supreme Court declared them void
In 1876. 2s An. $50, 39t. The COMMITTEES aver
that no evidence is found in the Office OF the
| Secretary of State OF the adoption oil the con-
stitutional amendments, and that In any
event they were proposed In 1874 not prolnll-
gated and form no part q the constitution
The funding act of 1874 Is also said to be null,
in part of members not chosen by the
people, but by the bayonet- and one Of the
authors Of the majority report advanced the
extraordinary doctrine that Louisiana mas
had no lawful government Tor years, and has
none to-day; because, said he, all govern
ment must rest upon the consent OF the gov
erned; and the people have not consented to
the constitution OF 1868 or any government
under it. Concede 1t. and what Is the logical
result2 Clearly that there Is no Constitutional
Convention. 1t is not pretended that by q
spontaneous movement the people In their
might assembled they sent the several men
assembled here to represent them. On the
contrary, We are assembled by virtue Of an
act of the Legislature Of 1879. Il that had
no lawful existence, neither has the body
which 1t convoked into existence. Tho argu.
ment proves entirely too much. Its unsOund
to the core
All remember with deep regret, and some
with awe, even now, the danger to which
republican form Of government was submitted
by the unwarranted interference OF the Fede-
raj government, and no one daprecates 1T
more than do; but, Mr.. President, there are
evils as great as that, and among the first Of
them number that condition OF government
which will permit @ majority accedng TO
power, to revolutionise society, to uproot
rights OF property and liberty, upon It's own
| ipse diTit that preceding legislature, the
judiciary or any department Of government
was not chosen according to Its idea OF pro-
priety or of law.
This doctrine ts monstrous; 1t Is against all
precedent and all law and all reason II car
Tied no society could substst. Government
would be revolution, perpetual and incessant;
no government would possess oven the sta
blity OF Mexican government, which now
and then does change President without
utter revolution.
The government Of 1874 whatever else may
| be said Of It, was government capable Of
making and enforcing Its laws; none Of the
other acts OF that Legislature have been as
sailed as null; rights acquired under, them
| have been uniformly maintained; it was,
therefore, In any event, &c tacto govern.
arbtter under the Federal constitution,
where feuds arise between contending par
ties, endangering the stability OF State gov
eminent, and 1t will not be necessary. to cite
authority to establish that, as such, It's acts
are entitled to full faith.
But, sir there Is more. AS against the
naked assertion on one hand, there is the con-
temporary action OF all the departments Of
our State to brush away the pretense.
| The courts have repeatedly considered and
adjudicated rights under this act: the Exeeu-
tive Department has carried out It's pro-
| visions, and the Legislature itself, Legisla-
been elected by the people, has formally recog-
nized and perpetltted It, though amended;
aud / add the great Democratic party itself
has declared it to be the law Of the land. This
with the holders Of State securities, placed
| beyond the reach OF this Convention by the
law OF 1874. even II 1t stood alone.
| Nor 10 this all; for amendments were pro-
posed to the constitution confirming the con-
| tract proposed as 10 the debt and submitted to
the people for their action. To these amend
ments 1t Is opposed: 1. That no evidence
exists In the Secretary OF States office that
thay were eye u & az stpptsa p That they we're
The requirements of the act submitting the
amendments to make them part Of the con-
stitution are: |. That majority OF the voters
at the election shall vote for their approval;
Governor and Secretary Of State. The simple
truth is that in the compilation Of votes re-
turned, under the election laws, the amend
ments are shown to be adopted by large
majority of voters, and q publication OF the
fact was made according to law.
In the case OF Rils vs.. Barrow, 20 A. 658,
the court hold that no special mode OF pro-
mitigation Is necessary PRONUNCIATION OF o
law Is not necessarily a condition preeedentto
It's enforcement; many laws are made to take
effect from and after their passage Promui-
cation Is a mere matter Of convenience for
the people, who are to obey tie law and may
be dispensed with altogether. Reference to
the act proposing the amendments shows that
such publication as was directed by its
provisions In reference to these amendments
was made.
But there is another and more conclusive
h,f,Vt fny{
tradictorily with the State In repeated cases
This amendment" says Mr.. Justice Man
ming, has become part OF the constitution
by It's subsequent ratification by the voters at
the pOlls." 80 A. Isl; II A. 583; 90 A. S65;
% A. 11.
And the Supreme Court of the United
States, in the case Of Board of Liquidation
VS.. McComb, 90 Otto $685. also hold that the
amendments were adopted.
II we are to live under a government of
laws; Ii we are not to be hereafter at the
mercy Of irresponsible temporary power,
then 1t does seem as II the continued action
OF all the departments Of State and the re-
peated adjudcations of the highest tribunals
should put an end to such pretense as these. |
II not the judiciary, who Is to decide whether
laws have passed, or amendments to the con
stituton have been adopted? Ii one set Of
people may decide this question to-day, why
may not another tomorrow? Why may they
not decide any and all questions for them
selves? II so, anarchy Of the worst character
reignS at once.
And now, Mr.. President, LET us turn to
another view Of this subject; and with the
considerations am now about submitting,
shall close what have to say
Mr.. President, reputation Is not the sug-
gestion Of to-day's distress. In the earliest
the Federal constitution was whether some
special provision should be made as to the
debts contracted and engagements taken
prior to the adoption of the constitution, Mr..
Madison said: DO gentlemen wish the pub
ton? Would the people at large wish to sat-
isfy creditors In such manner as to ruin
them There cannot be a majority Of the
people Of America that would wish to defraud
public creditors
The great patriots of that day would not
brook the idea of public discredit Rather
would they adopt the wise counsels Of Gov |
Randolph when he was told that their pay
ment would press upon the people: Justice, I
hnrro1xor bot tha1r hn