Year: 1876

We print on another page q noteworthy
letter from New Orleans lifting the curtain
on the politics of Louisiana and showing
| that Grantism is ''scotched but not killed
in the Southern States. The nomination Of
the notorious Marshal Packard as the repub
lican candidate for Governor is itself proof
that Grantism ''still lives" but the methods
by which it was accomplished and the plans
| for electing the candidate, as unmasked by
our intelligent correspondent, show that the
danger is not past Of again making that
State the victim of intimidation and fraud.
| The two leading competitors for the Guber-
Material nomination were Packard and War
moth. The tactics by which they sought to
circumvent each 9th make curious chap
ter of secret political history. We wish at
present to fix attention on feature
of their contest which throws light
on their estimate of the republican
chances for carrying the State. According
to the narrative of our correspondent both
| Packard and Warmoth spent money freely
| in purchasing the votes of colored delegates,
and it is laughable feature of the contest
that these worthless compared lists and found
that number of the delegates had Impair
TALLY sold themselves to both. But the sig
I nificant circumstances is that both candidates
thought the nomination worth purchasing
with money, which proves that neither OF
them is without hope that the republican
ticket may be voted in, or, at least, counted
in, which practically amounts to about the
same thing The letter of our correspond
ent shows on what this expectation is
| grounded.


| In the first place, the same Returning
Board which perpetrated the enormous
frauds Of 1874 is still in Office, and is OK
pected to render similar service for a sufi-
| cient consideration. In the next place, Kel-
logg still acts as Governor, and stands ready
to use his power of appointment and removal
to promote the success of the republican
party. In the third place, Packard, who got
the nomination. holds the Office of United
States Marshal and intends to utilize his
power of making arrests to intimidate the
conservative voters Of the State. His plan
of operations, as set forth in our New Orleans
letter, is consistent enough with the unscru-
pulous character of the man. He intends,
just before the election, to arrest individuals
in all parts of the State on the oaths of his
deputy marshals, who are tools selected to
do his bidding, and take them to New Or
| leans for Imprisonment, and he counts on
the concerted absence of the federal
judge to keep them in confinement
until the election is over. 1t is to be
hoped that the exposure of this infamous
plan may defeat it. But the fact that Pack
ard and Warmoth both thought the repub-
lican nomination worth purchasing proves
that neither of them despairs of carrying the
State. No two men understand the po-
litical situation in Louisiana more
thoroughly, or are greater adopts in
the art of managing elections by
fraud. It is therefore proper that the
conservatives be put on their guard and
warned against the reckless intriguers who
are plotting against fair election and an
honest counting of the votes. With the
election machinery and Returning Board in
the hands of their opponents they need to
exert oil their vigilance. democratic vic
tory in Louisiana is not so certain as the
|
and they must not be lulled into false Sc
curity. The Presidential election is likely
to be very close, and if it should so happen
that the electoral votes of Louisiana would
turn the scale the peace Of the country may
be put in jeopardy by dispute as to which
party is entitled to them.


1t will not do to say that the unsettled
|
South Carolina is not proper subject of
national attention. The separation between
federal and State politics is broader in law
than it is in fact. 1t is absurd to shut
our eyes to dangerous facts because they
happen to be at variance with precon-
ceived theory respecting the nature of our
| government. There is marked incon-
gruity between the original theory of our
institutions and tho practice which has
grown up under them. At IN early period
the federal government drew the State gov
ernments into its vortex and engulfed their
| independence. Our State elections, and even
our pettiest municipal elections, revolve
around questions of national politics. To
illustrate by a recent conspicuous instance,
the Ohio election last year, in which only
State officers were chosen, turned on the
currency question, which is within the ex-
elusive domain Of the federal authority.
The Hayes party and the Allen party alike
ran the State canvass on purely federal
issue, and it struck nobody, in Ohio or out
of Ohio, that there was anything inconsist-
ent with ordinary usage in subordinating
the politics of the State to question
with which no State government has
anything to do Some of the States have
sought to rescue their local affairs from the
federal vortex by holding their elections on a
different day; but this has only intensified