Year: 1874

universal consent stands at the head of the
American bar for character ability and expe-
rience. Any opinion of this profound and
illustrious jurist Will be read Win a''eh'ion
| even in case like this OF LOUISIANA where
Mr.. O'Conor's critics would be apt to say the


nolit;c;sn ahsorbs the lawyer. Ever since the


outbreak of the rebellion Mr.. OConor has


EXPRESSED extreme and unusual views upon
constitutional affairs. A recent lecturer upon
art in discussing the genius Of Turner ac-
counted for some of the peculiarities of his
later style by showing that he had disease
of the eye that made it impossible for him to
adjust the delicate shades of color What
seemed to him to be blue was really
shade of green. Mr.. OConor looked
upon secession and all the events resulting
as the unhinging of the American syst"m.
His mind was so severely logical, he had knelt
at the shrine of the constitution with so SIM
cere devotion, that the infractions of the su-
preme law which the suppression of the re-
bellon made inevitable filed him with pain.
From this he has never really recovered.
Better that the Union had fallen to pieces on
the rocks of extreme constitutionalism than to
live as it has lived-the expression of legislative
shifts and party expedients. Mr.. OConor's
patriotism seems to be like that of Goethe,
whose mind dwelt too much in the loftiest
empyrean of politics and science to fully share
the patriotic feelings that animated the Ger
mans against the French. He was in the
skies and not of the earth. While in the
tervor of patriotic anger we may censure the
apathy of Goethe and those like him, who
will not share the emotions of strife and war,
in time we come to respect the logical SINGER
ity with which they maintain the courage Of
| their convictions. 1t would be better for the
moral tone Of our public affairs if we had
more statesmen as brave as Charles OConor
1t will be seen that Mr.. OConor takes
direct issue with the opinions expressed by
Reverdy Johnson in the letter addressed to
the HERALD. Mr. johnson, our readers will
remember contended that while the Presi-
dent had erred in accepting any dictum or
opinion OF even decree from federal court
upon matter of State administration in
which the Courts had no jurisdiction, still the
question rested with him as an absolute Ex-
ecutive prerogative, and, having decided
it once, he had no power to reverse or
amend the decision. He showed by the
terms of unanimous decision OF the Supreme
Court in what is known as the Dorr Rebellion
case that the duty of the Executive in all such
matters was clear and that having recognized
Kellogg as Governor of Louisiana, no matter
how tainted his record, he was bound by
the consequences Of the act and Kellogg was
as much entitled to his protection and
TO demand the interference Of the federal
troops as Dix or Hartranft Mr.. O'Conor
contends that the President having made an
error and discovered the fact was bound to
remedy it. He finds an instructive ''strict-
ness and precision" in the fundamental laws
in all matters affecting the States. ut was
only, he says, 'in cases of imperious neces-
sity, and then under the most cautious limita-
tons, that the fathers consented to allow fed
eral interference with State elections How
ever fragrant the disorders and violations of
law and justice in the canvass or otherwise,
by which duly and fairly elected State officer
might be set aside and usurper permitted to
occupy his seat, it was deemed most expedient to
leave the remedial process in the hands Of the
State itself" Following this exact line of
obedience to States rights Mr.. OConor then
argues that the paramount authority in the
recognition of a State is Congress, and
that when Kellogg made an application to the
President for aid he ''presented merely
q renewal of the same precise question which
arose upon the first dispute-namely, was
Kellogg the duly elected Governor Of Louisi-
ana" If the President doubted his legality
then he should have decided according to his
conscience and withdrawn his recognition.


"Howeyer his original decision might control
others it was in no degree obligatory upon him
SELF Individual consistency in official opin-
ion or action is not to be maintained at the
expense of recttude and justice" 'Those
who condemn the Presidents original in ter


ference in Kellogg's favor have even more
reason for condemning his recent interposi


ton" No one can expect Kellogg to resign,
and the only hope Mr. O'Conor perceives for
Louisiana lis that the popular will of the
country, speaking through its efficient organ,


the independent press, may prevail upon the


President to reconsider his course"


So far as Louisiana is concerned we are so


profoundly convinced of the justice of the


McEnery movement that we should welcome


any method of reasoning which would enable


the President to give her people the relief so
sorely needed There is nothing the Presi-
dent could do, nothing be has done since his


imitation veto, that would crafty the country
' so much as the overthrow of the Kellogg gov
, ernment We must confess that we share the


fears of Mr.. O'Conor as 70 the resignation Of
3 Kellogg. But between his position and that
r of Mr.. Reverdy Johnson we are disposed e
agree with Mr.. Johnson. It lis hard to decid,
: when men as learned as these two venerable
i iurists differ but it seems TO us that tht