Year: 1866

D6r The following is from the N Y Post paper which supports President Johnson's reconstruction policy and favors the Phi!a- Convention but by no means approves his ac- ton relative to the New Orleans massacre.

 sWejustifed the President yester day for re- fusing to interfere in New Orleans ;; but it seems he dtd interfere. We do not understand the Presidents despatch to Mir Heron, the Attorney General of Louisiana

 In the first place, according to Mir Johnsons theory, Louisiana is a state of the Union why then does he interfere with the internal af fairs of Louisiana? Aconvention was to be held in Louisiana this convention was either legitimate or an illegitimate body. In the first instance it had right to sit :; in the se- cond, it was an illegal body, whose acts would be void and of no force, and whose members state laws by the state officers of justice. As they numbered only twenty six, their arrest, whenever their acts made them liable, could not have been difficult by the great state of Louisiana. We do not see on what plea the President had right to interfere or what business he had to issue any order in the mat ter. --.s

 Next, we find this order addressed not to the Governor of the state, but to the Attorney General Why is this? Does the President supersede the Governor?

 But, after all, it is not the Governor. nor the Attorney General, nor any state officer, but a local city officer, the Mayor of New Or leans-as it happens, fragrant and defiant rebel, Fho seems to think that the Presiden- tial pardon in his pocket not only condones his crime, but justifies it-it is this person who takes the matter in hand of arres ting the convention. Under his skillful management considerable percentage of the members were assassinated before they were arrested.

 We do not see how all this can be explain ed; :; we trust the President, by publishing the whole correspondence, of which we have now only his order, will be able to justify not on- ly the manner of his interference, but the act interference itself. For the present we can only say that his order appears to have had as unfortunate an effect as his 22d of Februa- ry speech; instead of comforting and protec- ting the law-abiding and lowal citizens seems to have encouraged bloody minded and vim dicative mob of men lately engaged in rebel lion instead of "suppressing all illegal or unlawful assemblies" in the words of the or der, the effect seems to have been to give full reign tosa most lawless and law defying mob, and to secure complete immunity from pun ishment to the rioters.

 Who made the President the judge of the legality of state convention? |? When did he hear evidence upon the matter? Where does he get his authority for interfering? By the Constitution, "the United States shall protest each state against invasion, and on applica- tion of the legislature or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.' Where was the "invasion"? where the domestic violence {? where the duplication of the legislature or of the executive? Where was even the danger to the public peace? convention numbering twenty-six men met in a hall in New Orleans Was it feared by the murderous mob, or by Mayor Munroe, that these twenty-six would rise and put the whole order of Thugs to the sword?

 Suppose the convention was illegal sup it had passed an ordinance, no matter to what intent-what then Its orders could have had no force. Ifthere had been doubt upon their legality, they ought to have been taken before the state courts. whose province it is to decide such questions. If civil government is restored in Louisiana, according to the Peace Proclamation, if Louisiana is state with a constitution, laws, officers, courts and judges then all such matters must be settled and de cided in the state. by the state officers; and the courts, not by mob.

 It does not escape the attention of the Unior loving people that every outrage like the New Orleans riot, in the southern states is done in the interests of oppression, and against equa rights and impartial justice, by men who were but lately zealous and fragrant rebels, snt who continue to boast of their crimes agains the country and the flag. Whether at Mem phis or New Orleans. in Richmond or in Geol gia, wherever we hear of mob violence, it is the violence, the brutal lawlessness of men lately engaged in an attempt to destroy the Union; and their victims are men, women and children whose loyalty to the Union was SC active during the war that no history of the war can be written without recording their courage, fidelity and self-sacrifce. It is not pleasant to Union-loving people to see the President of the United States, no matter by what accident or inadvertence, placed in the position of giving encouragement to such law lessness, and making less endurable the stuff ciently hard position of men who, with him, are hated and reviled by the late rebels as 'southern loyalists."