The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-07-17
THE MASS MEETING.

There is, we think, little to be said concern
ing the objects or result Of the meeting In La
fayette Square on Tuesday evening.
The gentlemen who were most aetive In
calling the meeting were quite sincere. no
doubt, as they were entirely consistent with
their tax-resisting and non paying princt-
piles. and there IL little doubt that they were
upset by the commnnistic declarations of the
sand-lot orator.
To the leaders Of the National Native
American Red Warrior organization, who 50
actively and theoretically lahored for some
days to supply the material for the meeting,
the occasion was one long to be remembered
II opens up to their view prospective political
combinations and to consequent political pre-
ferment III the future. which the DEMOCRAT
depriyed them of in the past by its fearless
exposures.
The resolutions demanding the adoption OF
the majority report appear somewhat ah-
surd, in view of the fact that the report itself
has long since been abandoned by Its former
supporters in the Convention. who seem now
more than willing to consent to q scale OF
twenty-five per cent on the present debt and
thus violate the instructions OF the mass
meeting to the extent OF nine millions.
II was difficult to follow the principal speak
or. MIRA. Il. Tucker, formerly Of st. Mary par
ish. From the published reports of the speech
81 this fossilated demagogue, IL would appear
that the principal part Of his speech was an
attack upon the managing editor OF the DEM
oCRAT. which we are advised is political In
It's character. and therefore proper subject
OF treatment In the columns Of the DEMO
Graf; at least to the extent OF separating the
falsehoods from the truth.
The charge that Z. A. Burke was formerly
Republican Is confessed by Mr.. Tucker to be
a falsehood by his statement that Mr.. Burke
was a Liberal" in 1879, inasmuch as Mf.
Burkes first entrance into politics was in
| that year, when his best exertions were given
to secure the election of Gov. John McEnery
and the Fusion ticket
1 Mr.. Tucker stated falsehood when he
charged that H. G. Warmoth had hand in
| framing the articles OF agreement proposed
+ y the Liberals In 1879 The committee Of
which the Hon. Louis Bush was chairman
framed those propositions In full committee,
and the originals are now before us In the
handwriting Of Mr.. Bush.
MIR. Burke pleads guilty to the charge OF
aiding in uniting the people OF Louisiana
who won the victories of 1879, 1874 and 1876.
When Mr.. Tucker charges political con-
nection between Gov. Warmoth and MIR.
4 Burke. other than that incidental to the
campaigns OF 1879, In which each supported
the McEnery ticket. Nj. Tucker proclatms
himself a base slanderer.
No one but reckless demagogue
would indulge In the base insinuatton
that the DEMOCRAT Is in any way
acting in the interest Of Carondelet street, or
from any pecuniary motive. Falsehood Is
mild term, poorly expressive Of the con-
temptible character OF the statement.
I And now as to Mr.. Tucker, he should have
recolected maxim OF his profession, and in
prosecuting before the bar Of public opinion
be should have "come into court with clean
hands,
If we mistake not, he is the same Tucker
whose disreputable conduct lost him the re-
spect of the people OF st. Mary parish. ant
who has hem pronounced by the Supreme
Court Of the United States, to have been {
party to a fraud, and little better than com
mon swindler.
In the case Of Carey ct al. VS.. Brown, p. III
Otto ., or u. s. 90. the Court uses the follow
) Ing language:
t The certificate was false, and -
knew It, 1t cannot be doubted tina
Tucker knew these facts. It Is impossi
BILE to resist the conviction that there
was deliberate scheme, and that all the ap
, pellants and Tucker were parties toit.
A case OF clearer equity on one side, and q
!, iniquity on the other, is rarely presented 10y
the consideration OF a court OF justice.