Year: 1874

SAhES GohUON BENNETT Eult0r OF the HERALD,


New York


DEAR SIR-In compliance with the request con.
tanned In your note of the 10Th insG give you the
subjoined opinion "upon the Louisiana difficulty"
The questions the occasion present are OF I'M.
portance to the whole country, as well as TO
Louisiana. They should, therefore be treated with
much deliberation and in no partisan spirit. /
proceed to consider them under three heads,
VIII


Ftrst-Was the President right, IN the first in
stance, in recognizing Kellogg as the Governor Of
the State


Second-lf he was not, had the people any right
to drive Kellogg from power, as they have DONE
by force OF arms, and TO take possession of tho
government .


Thtrd--Has the President right to restore
Kellogg and the government OF which he was the
headf


In my opinion the President committed an error
In considering Kellogg as the legitimate Governor.
He seems to have acted regardless OF the fact
whether he had been elected by majority of the
people Of the State. His opponents insisted that
he had not been, and there Is every reason
to believe that this they were cor.
rect. The Presidents course was apparently
adopted by reason Of a judgment, or decree.
of the United States District Court or the State.





decree, and as 1t assumed the election OF Kellogg
he thought he was to take that election as con-
clusvely established. In this, think, the Presl-
dent was clearly wrong. The question whether a
State government has been legitimately estab-
ished Is not u Judicial one. The courts OF the
United states are not vested with any authority to
consider 1t. This. in the nature OF things, must be
so. How Is such fact when disputed, to be
ascertaned when the ground OF the dispute Is
that the party claiming to have been elected did
not receive majority OF the legal votes? Are
the witnesses to be examined by the courtsS Are
the ballots which have been cast to be prOducedr
Is the competency OF each voter to be passed upon?
1t must be obvious that over such inquiries no
court OF the United States has jurisdiction. The
question is political one, and is to be adjudged
by the political department Of the government.
This was clearly ruled by the Supreme Court in
the case Of Luther vs.. Borden 9th H0ward). In
that case the facts were these:-


RHODE ISLAND, AFTER THE REVOLUTION,
had no other constitution until ls43 than its colo
NAL charter, granted by Charles the Second in
1868. The provisions OF that charter were sup
posed by many and probably by majority OF the
people OF the State, to be, in certain essential
particulars, anti-republican. They resolved,
therefore, to substitute another constitution, and
for this purpose convention was held and new





popular election, Dorr was chosen Governor. He
then attempted to get possession by force, and
was successfully resisted by the charter govern
ment. The question came before the Supreme
Court In the case referred TO, instituted by Luther
who was acting under the Dorr constitution, to
recover damages Tor q trespass alleged to have
been committed by Borden, who had proceeded
under the authority Of the charter government.
The opinion OF the Court was given by
Chief Justice Taney, and there was no
dissent upon the point adverted to.
1t was expressly held that the inquiry whether q
government exists in any State Is a political and
not judicial one. The language of the Court is,
"that the inquiry belonged to the political power
and not to the judicial" and "that 1t rested with
the political power to decide whether the charter
government had been displaced or not" In the
same case it was decided that when the President
is called upon to protect State against domestic
violence, in the manner provided Tor by the fourth
section OF the fourth article Of the constitution he
is compelled to determine whether the Gover-
nor or the Legislature Of the State
making the call Is or is not legiti-
mate, and his determination is cOncl uslve
The result OF these several rulings seem obvious
Judge Durell had no authority whatever to pass
upon the question whether Kellogg had been duly
elected Governor. That was question which.
when properly brought before the President, he
was 10 determine for himself The action Of the
Judge possessed for him, nor for anybody else, no
authority whatever. Consequently the President,
when he recognized Kellogg as he is understood
to have done, exclusively upon the ground OF that
action, fell into an error. He abandoned-unde-
slgnedly, no doubt-the duey whica the constltu-
tion devolved upon him, and sought authority for
what he did under judgment Of United States
Judge, which, as to him. was entirely void.


SECOND.


But the President having recognized Kellogg
whether upon sufficient evidence not, that
recognition was at once absolute and final. The
people Of the State consequently, however unjust
and injurious to them may have been the decision,
possessed no right to subvert the government 80
by lorce OF arms, except as such right
was revolutionary one. right OF revolution
can never be supposed to exist under an estab-
lished government. Such right, indeed, sup
poses no existing legal authority, but asserts
Itself upon natural and elementary prn-
ciples, such as are stated In our Declara-
ton OF independence. But the States OF this
Union, however sovereign they are IN many re-
spects, are not wholly 80. Each State is bound to
the other states and to the United States and the
is such that right by force to change
her form OF government is not possessed by her, as
It's exercise might interfere with the relation that
she bears to her sister States and to the para.
mount authority OF the United States. The gov
ernment OF Kellogg may have been grievous in the
extreme to the people of Louisiana, and, no
doubt, 1t was so. It's corruption and abuse
Of power threatened the state with bankruptcy,
and were destructive Of all individual enterprise
and happiness. Keogg's election Is SAID to have
been accomplished by means Of gross frauds upon
the fran chse, and this is reported by committee
vested with the power to make the inquiry by the
Senate Of the United States That report, and the
speech OF the Hon. Mr.. Carpenter in support oft,
1t is thought, make good the allegations OF fraud
to all who are not blinded by partisan
prejudice. Notwithstanding all the sad con-
sequences OF the existence Of the Kellogg gov
ernment the sufferers cannot legally find redress
In violence. They must await the elaboration oil
Congress and the President and must hope q
trust not In vain that they WILL at an early day,
give them relief. That the President can have no