Newspaper Page Text
PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS
By D. B. Freeman, Proprietor.-
rates of subscription.
Year * $2.00
, x Months
fn copies one year 16 00
> Commuiiic'i(ions on matters of pub
lic interest solicited.
SPEECH OF HON. B. H. HILL,
In the Hull of the House of Repre
sentatives. at Atlanta- on the Even*
iug of January 20, 1875.
Ladies and fellow-citizens :
I feel the compliment of this call to
address you. It not only implies, but
it digresses, confidence. Their confi
dence is the only favor I have ever asked
of the people of Georgia. To that I am,
hnd ever have been, entitled, and most
bntitled when most denied. I fee! most
profoundly the responsibility that devol
ved upon me itt ttqjpepiifig this Call to ad
dress Jott. I Would be insincere if I
professed to be surprised at the events
which have recently seemingly so star
lied the country. I bate hot been sur
brised, but I would been agrees--
t*)jf gttffrfisedj if those events had not
transpired. I shall be still more agree
ably surprised if those events do not re
peat themselves on a larger scale. I
feel embarrassed, however, because 1
am confident that the great duty of
averting the evil which these events
threaten, is with the Northern people.
There the issue must be solved I know,
too, that the intelligence and virtue of
that people will be subjected to the se
verest test. I feel, also, that the dis
cussion which must enlighten their in
telligence, and which must awaken the
patriotism of that virtue, must takejplace
in the councils of the nation. There
the different sections, through their
champions, meet face to face There
the oppressor and the oppressed look at
at each other, eye to eye, and he who
has the truth, must show his manhood
to vindicate it. (Applause.)
The Northern reople are not likely to
look with much favor upon what are
called ex parte utterance*, especially in
the Southern States. lam sure that I
desire in every possible way to contrib
ute to the success of the great issues,
which I know are now to be precipita
ted upon the country iu the next two
years. It would pain m; exceedingly
for anything to drop from me that could
be used for aiding the enemy and dis
couraging our friends. Nevertheless,my
friends, there are some things which I
think can be properly said here, and
profitably be said now. And while I
feel constrained in my efforts to address
you, and shall make something of an ef
fort to confine myself within the sphere
of a limited talk, I shall nevertheless,
endeavor to make myself perfectly un
derstood in what I shall say.
The greatest difficulty iu the way of
saving a people from a threatened danger,
is to make that people conscious that the
danger is approaching. There is not a
sadder feature of the world's history
than this, that almost all people who are
destroyed are destroyed chiefly by their
refusing to see the dangers approaching.
The word which has perhaps been of
tener spoken during the last fourteen
years than any other word in the En
glish language is, in my opinion, the
word that is least understod by the
American people. In American poli
tics who is a rebel ? Now in Germany,
in Russia, in France, even in England
where we get the most, it is true, of
the great principles of government, the
word “ rebel ” has a well defined signi
fication The definition in either one
of those countries is wholly inappropri
ate in this. There, a rebel is one who
resists the government —their govern
ment is represented in the king or in
the emperor. Here government is the
mere machinery, the mere organization
for the administration of the laws. Gov
ernment is not the king, is not the pow
or. is not the sovereign in America.—
The question recurs then, in American
politics, who is a rebel ? A real rebel ?
When the framers of the Constitution
were about to couclude their work, the
question naturally occurred to them, as
it did on several occasions during their
labors, “In what way should they bind
those who should undertake to admin
ister the goveromert to be faithful to
their obligations !" There was some dis
cussion, but finally it was determined
that the President and every officer of
the government, State and Federal,
should take an oath to support the Con
stitution. Now the inquiry is pertinent,
why not take an oath to support the
Union ? Why not take an oath to sup
port the government? Why did they not
require them to take an oath to preserve
liberty ? Yet of all these propositions
not one of them was adopted. Various
suggestions were made. One disting
uished gentleman who had taken a large
part in framing the Constitution sug
gested there should be no oath at all,
and he gave this significant reason for
it, if the government is administered by
good men, no oath will be necessary ; if
by bad men, no oath will be regarded.
But it was agreed on all hands, after
various suggestions, that there should
be an oath. Then what sort of an oath
phould it be ? Finally one conclusion
was arrived at, adopted, and that was
that every officer of this government,
State and Federal, should be required to
take an oath to support the Constitution !
Now why, why, why that oath in pref
erence to all others ? Because when they
to°k an oath to preserve the Constitu
tion, and kept that oath, they supported
everything else. The Constitution was
ordained and established as the means
by which the Union was to be made
perfect, by which domestic tranquillity
was to be secured, by which justice was
established, public welfare provided for,
od by which the blessings of liberty
s O'uld be secured to them and their
posterity. [Applause.] Therefore they
required the oath to support the Con
stitution, as the terms on which, and tbe
Oieans by which the Union was to be
Preserved, domestic tranquillity secured,
ar * l be blessings of liberty and justice
perpetuated In addition to this requi
on to take an oath to support the
oiutitution and the laws passed in
ol it should be the supr ern
CflU)oun tDeekh) ®ittm
VOL. V.
law of the land ; that is, the only king
whose authority all power in America
was required to obejr, was the Consti
tution of the country. That was the
supreme law. What Constitution ? The
written Constitution as adopted, to be
supported as the means by which ail
the other ends of government were to
be secured and perpetuated.
Now answer me the question, who in
American polities is a rebel? I an
swer, he and he only who is faithlul lo
the Constitution ! (Continued ap
plause.'' Who in American politics is
a patriot? I answer, he and he only
who is faithful to the Constitution !
(Great applause.)
Our fathers exhibited immense wis
dom in requiring this oath support
the Constitution. There were two par
ties in the Convention that framed the
Constitution from the beginning—one
represented the extreme idea of a strong
CefttfaliZed government; ihe other rep
resented the opposite extreme idea of a
loose uncentralized government, with
all power —obligatory power —in the
States. The Constitution is the result
of a compromise between those two
extremes. Now, it is remarkable that
our fathers foresaw, with wisdom, that
while this Constitution was adopted as
a compromise measure, that the proba
bilities were that the disciples of the
respective theories, in the future, might
seek to impress their several construc
tions, even to the final subversion of
the Constitution iiself. What was
called the States rights party became
satisfied, because while the Constitution
did incorporate some National features,
yet the system of government estab
lished was a Federal Republic. But
when the Constitution was submitted to
the States for ratification, some of them,
to remove doubts on this point, ratified
it on condition that a number of amend
ments should be adopted, one of which
was an express declaration that all the
powers not delegated to the general
government were reserved to the State.
From that day forth the government
was fixed as a Constitutional Federal
government. But there were in that
early day men in favor of establishing
what the” called a strong central gov
ernuient, and the greatest advocates of
a strong central government came from
New England, because it was the pe
culiar theory of Puritanism to have the
right to meddle in everybody else’s
business. [Laugbtei] The idea of
living in a government without the
right to meddle with everybodv’s bus
iness was contrary to their principles of
religion and notions of propriety. —
Therefore, the real enemies of the Con
stitution came from this school. * *
They have produced nearly all the
fanatics of the world any how.—
[Laughter ] They have never attack
ed the Constitution directly. They
have labored from the beginning of the
government indirectly to centralize it.
I mean by indirectly, they have always
seized upon subjects of public interest
aud sought by use of those questions to
inflame the minds of the people, so as
to secure power, and by that power cen
tralize the government. I am not go
ing to give you a detailed history of
the struggle, nor take up the questions
that were raised by this party for the
purpose of using them to accomplish
the end proposed. I will say simply
here that the one they found most suit
ed to their purpose, was the institution
of domestic slavery, in the Southern
States. That question they made a
question of conscience and attacked
the institution of slavery vigorously at
a very early day, and they sought to in
terfere with that institution through
the agency of the Federal government.
But the South always replied to their
assaults, “ Here is the Constitution —
that gives the Federal g >vernment no
right to interfere with our institutions
ourforefathetS defended domestic slavery
on that ground alone; it was a matter
left to the States. For more than fifty
years that question was discussed at va
rious times, and at every favovable c -
portunity, the centralists never taileu
to use it for their purposes. But they
were always defeated just so long as the
Southern States stood square’y by the
Constitution, and offered that as a reply
to all their assaults. They were sus
tained by an overwhelming majority ol
the people of both the South the
North. For the Northern people, though
opposed to slavery in the abstract, still
reverenced tbe Constitution, and insist
ed that that was a question to be refer
red to the States solely for themselves
Several cases arose in which the contest
became heated The Missouri comprom
ise in 1820 is familiar to you all The
questionwas inflamed to a great deal ol
heat when we acquired new territory
from Mexico. * * * _ *
You remember the contest of ISol and
1852, during which time this tanatical
partv, these enemies of the ConstitUr
tion, used every effort poss ble to get
power in the government, not so much
for the purpose of destroying slavery
as the purpose of centralizing the gov
ernment and destroying the Constitu
tion, as I will prove directly by the
most conclusive proof. Unfortunately,
without any just legal reason, yet actu
ally, the first advantage which the ene
mies of the Constitution acquired upon
this subject was upon the rc- eal ot the
Missouri compromise in 1854 and 1855.
They got their advantage in this wise :
they charged that slavery, which had
hitherto been on the delensive, had now
taken the aggressive, and they acquired
much influence over the Northern peo
ple on that account. * * v
But this party acquired its great strength
when the Southern people, provoked by
the infidelity of the Northern States to
the Constitution upon this subject, se
ceded from the Union. W hen we se
ceded, why, of course, we lelt the gov
ernment in the hands of these, its ene-
CALHOUN, GA., WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 3,1875.
mies. and we left our friends in the
hands of these enemies also, in all rev*
olutions, so in this the extreme mei
took the lead. They had learned to
hate the South, becau c e the South had
so often held up the Constitution as its
shield and protection against interfer
ence and they hated the Constitution
the more because it was the shield and
protection of the South. They had de
clared it a covenant with hell, and a
league with death, and appealed to a
higher law. But as soon as the South
left the Union, they became the most
wonderfully devoted lovers of the Un
ion ever beard of. (laughter) When
they could not control the government,
they denounced it; but the moment the
South left the Union, they raised the
cry at once that the Union must be pre
served.-(laughter) Well, as Isay, se
cession gave them a great opportunity
to accomplish their purpose ; therefore
they declared that they would make
war to preserve the Union—they would
enforce the law. (laughter) I merely
give you this recital to bring you to the
point I am going to discuss.
They waged war against these States,
not because these States had violated
the Constitution, for if there is anything
that distinguished the Southern people
more than any other thing in their en
tire political history from 1787 to 1860,
it was undying devotion to the principles
of government, as declared in the Con
stitution. [Great applause.] Therefore,
I have often said I would defy any man
living to day to point out to me one
single instance where a Southern State
or a Southern leading statesman was ev
er faithless to the Constitution. [Ap
plause ] Notone. The Southern States
left the Union, or sought to leave it,
only because of the infidelity of the
North, under the lead of those fanatics,
to the terms of the Union ; and they who
had been unfaithful to the terms of the
Union ; seized the opportunity of secess
ion to destroy those who had been faith
fuband who had on'y resented their in
fidelity.
Well, lam not going through the
history of the war. but you know, my
countrymen, that it was the cry raised
at the North that “ the Union shall be
preserved, that we cannot consent to a
disruption of the Union,” that rallied
all parties North to the war. Our friends
at the North—the friends of the Con
st!'ution—were placed in this predica
ment by our unwise secession; they
were compelled to fight us, or to fight
the Union, and so they fought us. and
they did fight. No mistake about that.
But they were mistaken, as they are
now find ng out. When they were
fighting us, they were fighting the only
party on this continent who were ready
to shed blood in defer eses of the Con"
stitution. [Continued applause] Of
course, all simple minded men, who sup
posed that war was waged for the pres
ervation of the Union, look it for grant
ed that when the Union was preserved,
the war would end. Why not ? and
therefore it was that in the Congress of
the United States it was over and over
declared, solemnly declared, under the
sanction of their oaths,approved by their
President, endorsed by their State leg
islatures —that in waging the war for
the preservation of the Union, they had
no intention of impairing the Constitu
tional rights of the States or the proper
ty of the citizens. Under such decla
rations, they rallied all (he Northern
people in support of what they called
the Union, and of course it was expect
ed that when the war ended, and the
Union was preserved, everybody would
be satisfied. But not so Just at ilie
time we began to weaken on account ol
the unfortunate divisions in the South,
and these infidels to the Constitution saw
that we were going te fail, they brought
forward the proposition that slavery
must be abolished. And why ? Why.
because si; very, they said, was the cau~e
of all the trouble, and if the w~r
ended the Union preserved and
slavery remaining, as slavery had
provoked one war a. and one secession,
it would provoke another, and therefore
they should not ce’y preserve the Union
but destroy ihe cruse that threatened
the Union, and they abolished slavery.
Of course, then, everybody supposed
that when the Union preserved and
slavery abolished, those good men would
be satisfied ; now they would come <o
the support of (he Constitution. But
just ns soon as the Union was preset ved
and slavery abolished, and the South
ern people had agreed to both, and
were eaey to renew their allegiance to
the Constitution, with no more secession
and no more slavery, we were met with
the startling demand that tbe Southern
States must first be reconst, noted. —
(Laughter and applause )
Well, that was something unheard of.
Who gave Congress a light to tecon
struct a State? But it was no use to
talk about Congressional power under
the Constitution then. The conqueror
has the power; that is the will of i itecon
queror became the supreme law Instead
of the Constitution. Now, as I said to
my Noi.hem I'pcnds, if the will of the
conquetor has become the supreme law
of the land, certainly while they were
engaged in the work rf reconstructim,
iliey ought to have taken an oath to
support the conqueror and not to sup
port the Constitution. But the truth is,
the haters of the Const iiulion well knew
the Constitution could still live wi h se
cession abandoned i’nd slavery abolished,
and they had determined it should not
live. Therefore they determined to keep
up the war on the South by seme form,
and reconstruction was the form uext
adopted.
Well, I will not go over the history of
reconstruction Thank God, the whole
world knows my opinion of recorstruCr
tion, that is, they would if human lan
guage could express it, but human lan
guage is too feeble. [Applause,]
Reconstruction t vdi but an ordeal by
.v Mcii they disfranchised the intelligence
md virtue of the country, and au her
ized the ignorance and vice of the coun
try to build and to control new govern
iiiefits for the people, as the ooly m attS
of keeping these States in accord with
Radieuli in [Enthusiastic applause ]
Well, after so long a time, we thought
reconstruction was over. Now surely
we will have peace. Surely secession
abandoned ; the Union preserved; sla
very abolished; slaves all freemen;
freemen all citizens; citizens all voters j
YolfctS ail rulerfi. , [Great laughter and
dtfplattee.) Surely tftfw, oh I no# you
Will come back to the Cottstitution.—
Not yet I But if those who provoked
_ esaion and then iuaugu ted war up
on the South, if they were satisfied
with the Constitution and dissatisfied
only with the institution of slavery, why,
when slavery was abolished, were they
not satisuod ? If they waged war only
to preset *e the Union, why, why when
the Union was preserved, were they no
satisfied ? If the only object in recont
structing the States was to secure what
they called the fruits of the war, why,
when the work of reconstruction was
complete, why were they not satisfied ?
No, my countrymen here is the great
truth, and let the people see it: The
real cause of the dissatisfactioa from the
beginning, has not been on account of
slavery, or with the Southern master.
The real underlying cause of dissatisfac
tion with the leaders at th<f North in
this fanatical crusade has been dissatis
faction with the Constitution itself.—
(Applause.) Therefore it is they have
not been satisfied, and therefore it is
they will not be satisfied until the Conn
stitution is absolutely subverted and
destroyed. They mean to have a
strong government. They mean a cen
traliized despotism. They have not
the manliness to confess it, but their
whole history is demonstrative truth of
t’ e fact, and the people of the Union
will be slut id indeed if they require
further proof to convince them of the
fact.
How greatly were they mistaken who
advised us to accept reconstruction as a
means of ending the demand. I never
believed the demands would end as long
as Radicalism was in power.
So they took their own course as
they saw r fit, and they refused to be sat
isfied. T ey sent their miserable crea
tures here, to take charge of ihe ne
groes and lunder the people of the
Slates as long as. we had anything to
take, and then the. issued bonds all
over the country and put unde mort
gage eyeryt ing that our children and
children’s children will be able to make
for the next fifty years, aud still they
are not sa isfied. Now, what does this
mean ? There is no war, and yet the
military is still employed. Reconst rue
tion is over, and yet the States have no
freedom. And interference is as active
and bigoted and as aggressive this day
as it ever was. and more so, for usurpa
tion as it advances always increases
both in impudence and rascality.
You have seen a great deal lately
about Louisiana, that poor, impoverish
ed, insulted, downtrodden State, and
you seeui to have a g’eat deal of sym
pathy for Louisiana. Well, she merits
the sympathy aud admiration of all ;
but oh ! my friends, are you so thought
less as to suppose that these rebels
against the Constitution have any spe
cial hatred for Louisiana ? Not at all.
They like that State just as well as they
do you. They like one State -just as
well as they do any other State. I tell
you every stab which the assassin sends
to the heart of throttled Louisiana, he
is practic ng the art, that he may with
greater skill stab the next State. [Ap
plause.] They are establishing prece
dents, because precedent submitted to.
becomes law. Now let us go a little
into this thing, because it is a subject
going lo interest this whole country. —
Every blow struck a£ Louisiana is aimed
at every State in the Union, because ev
ery blow at Louisiana is a blow at the
Constitution of the Union
Now, briefly, in 1572 an election
was held in Louisiana. It was evi
dent that the Deuiocr tic party, or at
least the anti Radical party, elected
their Governor aud their Legislature.
It was determined that that election
should not stand. But Warmouth, the
Governor at the time, refused to coun
tenance the movement to reconstruct
Louisiana again, and give her a Gov
ernor and Legislature contrary to the
will of the people. This Radical rarty
does everything “ under color of law,"
aud sometimes they nmnufactuie both
law and the color too. [Laughter.]
Every usurper in hisory defends his
usurpation according to law. [Laugh*
ter.] As the Governor of Louisiana
was opposed to the movement, it be
came necessary, in order to give the
law a color, to apply to another depart
merit of government. That necessita
ted a resort to Durell You have heard
of Durell. Kellogg filed his bill in
Bareli’s coutt >'i'u enjoined McEnery
from being inaugurated Governor.—
But that would amount to nothing un
der the laws of Louisiana, for the Leg
isla'ure hud the Jinal count, and if the
McEnery Legislature was allowed to
organize, they would count the vote
correctly, and Kellogg would fail
Therefore it was necessary to get rid
not only of McEnery but of the
Legislature also, and Antoine, who was
Lieutenant Governor on the ticket with
Kellogg, filed a bill also for the pur
pose of getting an injunction against
what is called the MeEuery Legis’a
ture. Now it has been denied in some
quarters, that Durell ever interfered
with the assembling of the Legislature.
I have his order here, I have the bill
filed by Antoine, I have the order of
Durell passed upon that bill, and here
he enjoins 103 members of the House
■>l i lit I’t ill - i1o! i0 ‘I W
seats in the Legislature except as pe
itted. It was all nonsense to sect*
the Governor and let the Deoi itr
gH the Legislature, and then by au
thority of law count the vot(£ and d
clare McEnery Governor; and the ef
fective order that did the work was the
-der that interfered with the organizu
ti • Iv* *. - out Xvwh t
are those gentlemen to do, who say* that
Durell had jurisdiction of this malU:
under the enforcement act; for the r *
forcemeat act expressly provides that
it shall n r, t apply t * f, v* •*> -mb rs of
the Legislature. I will read you what
Senator Morton said on this point ibe
cause it is said vGiatever a witness -sv*
.•binst himself must b* tik n r
granted. Here is what Mr. Morion
says: “In the Antoine case Judge
Durell not only assir.ies to deteiur.ie
who constituted the legal returning
board, but to prescribe who shoud b
permitted to take part in the organiza
tion of the Legislature, and r<- -o.;
all persons from taking part in such or
ganization who were not returned by
the Lynch board as elected ; and this
assumption was made in the face of the
express provisions of the act of IS7O,
tii.it it* ben fils li -iel n i \i ud t<
candidates for election for Congress or
fr the Suite Legisi-tuni. , t
is what Morion says He geos on an
says, his (DurellV) order issued In thd
Kellogg case to the United ''t t- , .> •
shal, to take possession of the State
House * * *
can only be characterized as a gross
usurpation. Now, I will give Morton
the credit for this. He has always
said Durell’s order was a gross usurpa
tion. He has suppoi ted Kellogg upon
other grounds. He has endeavored to
keep Kellogg in office, but I must say
that even M rton had not the face to
say that Du ell had jurisdiction. On
the contrary, he says lie was guilty of
gross usurpation and that hts urder can
only be characterized as a gross usurpa
tion. What is the effect? You have
heard it said that the President is not
to determine whether the court has ju
risdiction or not —that he must presume
it to be correct. I will give Grant the
credit to say that even lie never said
that Durell had jurisdiction. Now,
what is the effect ? lam not going to
stop to discuss this point. What is
the effect of a judgment of a court
that has no jurisdiction of either the
person or the subject matter ? What
would be the effect of a judgment by
Judge Hopkins, of the Atlanta circuit,
against a man in Alabama touching
property in Alabama? What effect
would a judgment by Judge Hopkins
have in a matter that pertains solely to
the Federal court? There is a great
difference between an erroneous judg
ment, where jurisdiction exists, and a
judgment without jurisdiction.
Bui I will not stop to explain to you
the difference, because I have the dif
ference expressed in one brief sen
tence, uttered by the greatest Judge
that ever sat upon the fench in Amer
ica.
Chief Justice Ma; shall, in the Su
preme Court of the United States, in
the glorious days of the Republic, when
that court commanded the respect of
alhmankind, (applause) stated the dif
ference very clearly in a few words, and
as it is directly to the point I am dis
cussing, I will read it:
“ The line which separates error in
judgment from the usurpation of pow
er, is definite. In the one case, it
is a record importing absolute verity.—
lu the other case,” that is, in the case
of a want of jurisdiction, “it is mere
veasit paper that is, it is as worth
less as a piece of paper on which noth
ing is written at all. That is what
Chie. Justice Marshall says. But Kel
logg acquired power, by virtue of that
order, enforced by Grant’s bayonets.—
Of course, all the orders passed by Du
rell would have been disregarded if
General Grant had not enforced them
by the bayonet. Even Worr outh dis
regarded these orders. He said they
were nothing but waste paper. He
had the authority of Chief Justice Mar
shall to say they were waste paper, and
in that emergency Grant sent his
troops.
Thus the Kellogg governm nt was es
tablished. But it was said that, not
withstanding all these things—said by
the advocates of Kellogg—that he was
really elected by the people—that they
wanted him to be governor and they would
support him in the office, and it was un
necessary to keep him in office, by the
U. S. forces, and that if U. S. forces
were withdrawn the people of Louisi
ana would be satisfied with the Kellogjr
government. Well, in September, 1574,
they did withdraw the U. S. troops, and
give the patriots of Louisiana a chance.
There is one question not yet settled,
and that is, how long Kellogg’s govern
ment did stand after the U. S. troops
were withdrawn. Some said it stood
an hour—some say two hours, and some
say just long enough for Kellogg to run
from his office to the custom house.—
(Great laughter and applause ) But it
is agreed on all hands that it did not
stand any longer than Kellogg was run
ning (Laughter.)
Very well, Grant interfered again,
and sent troops and reinstated Kellogg.
Now, fellow-citizens, here was a dem
onstration that the Kellogg government
could not stand alo- e. could not stand
an hour —nobody would support it. To
the eternal credit of the colored people
of Louisiana, be it said, that they had
too much honor, too much decent self
respect to support the Kellogg govern
ment! (Long continued applause.)
Well, the people of Louisiana said we
will not resist the United States govern
ment. Kellogg took the office. Then
they organized for another election —
an election not for governor, but foran
other legislature. They were just in
the fix that we were in 1870. The
term of the Legislature expired io two
years. Kellogg held his office for four
years, and they had to have anew elec
tion for a Legislature. The election
came off, and now
LOOK AT THIS PICTURE !
Our friends went to the polls under
every disadvantage. Kellogg had his
own election law. Kellogg had b : s own
officers to manage that. They were
assisted by the United States troops, as
sisted by the United States Marshalls
and supervisors—and yet under b : sown
law, with his own officers, supported by
United States troops, our people went
to the poHs and overthrew his dynasty
by a majority *f ten thousand votes !
[Applause and cheering ] lam stating
facts that I got from the report of the
congressional committee itself, one of
the mo6t interesting papers I have ever
read in American history—two of them
Republicans, but strange as it may seem
to you, exceedingly honest men !
[Laughter and applause.] They report
that at that election, with nil these dis-
advantages, the Conservatives elected
their legislature, (the House of Repre
sentatives,) by 29 majority out of 111.
That is, the Democrats elected 70 mem
bers, and the Republicans 41. That is
what this committee say, and they say
that the election was fair and peaceable,
and l''gal in all respec's.
A ow, there was trouble ! Why, if
(his Legislature went into power, the
idea was that Kellogg would be impeach
ed or rendered powerless, and they de
termined that this should never be, and
they took charge of the returning board.
lam not goirg into detaih it is enough
to say that after six or eight weeks’ man
ipulating the returns, this board threw
enough Democrats out and put Radicals
in,till Kellogg says the result was 53 and
53. Rut they said he put in one Demo
crat that was not a “ staying Democrat”
(laughter.) Ido not know what kind
of a Democrat that was (laughter.) I
reckon it one that would go on ei
ther side to get an office. 1 ?ve seen
a gooa many of them mysuif (more
laughter.) Another report said that
the Radicals had 54 and the Democrats
52. Anyhow they thought they had it,
so that if they could not control it they
could at least prevent the dethronement
of Kellogg.
Well, when the Legislature suet, on
the fourth of January, it turned out one
Republican was not there. He had been
stealing something—a veiy strange|thing
for a Radical to steal something—[pro*
longed laughter and applause.] Anyhow
the committee, the Congresssional com
mittee, cannot say he was charged with
stealing, but they softened the word and
say he “ embezzled [Great laughter.]
That was unfortunate—this fellow that
had “embezzled” something, W T hen
the Legislature met he was not there.—
[Moie laughter.] The Democrats had
the advantage.
The committee say there was doubt
about it; that he was arrested on war
rant for embezzlement by the officers of
that Radical government. By this ab*
sence and superior quickness, our friends
secured the organization of the Legisla
ture, and elected their officers, and then,
having a majority, they also swore in
five members whom the returning board
had referred to the Legislature. And
thus were the Democrats in power at
last, by five or six majority, after sev
eral weeks manipulation of the Ra als
to prevent it. What was to bo done '(
After ail this rascality, after their six
months’ orgies of infamy for the purpose
of defeating the will of the people, jt
seemed,at last,by the unfortunate,unheard
of stealing by a Radical, the Democrats
got the power. [Laughter and applause.]
That was not to be endured. The result
you have heard. Soon after they organ
ized, the military was sent in and abso**
lutely removed five Democratic mem
bers by force. Don’t you see the rea**
son of this wrong ? Don’t you see why it
was one of the greatest usurpations in
history ? It is an essential feature in
America, as well as in England, that
each House of a Legislative body shall
be the sole judge of the election, quali
fication and returns of its members, else
there is no independence in that branch
of the government. If anybody else,
judiciary or executive, has the right to
review the actions of the Legislature as
to determining who are the qualified
members duly elected, of cou ! se the.
independence of that body is gone, and
according to the Constitution of the
United States each House shall be tlie
sole judge of who are its members, and
also, I think, a similar provision exists
in the Constitution of every State in
the Union, certainly in the Constitution
of the State of Louisiana. Now, the
question who the members of that Leg
islature were,belongs exclusively to that
body. They did determine, and accord
ing to the report of this Congressional
committee they determined rightly on
the merits of the question ; but even
if they did not the military had no
right to interfere ; for the moment you
allow the government to interfere, that
moment you put the Legislature iu the
power of the executive.
250 years ago the House of commons
wrested from the House of lords and the
king, the right to sit in judgement sole
ly on the “election, returns and qualifis
cations’' of the members of that body ;
and from that day to this it has been
conceded to be the established, Constitu
tionally,universal right of Legislative
bodies. That light has been destroyed in
Louisiana. |Their House determined its
organization. That House determined its
own members. The determination did
not,suit the powers at Washington, and
Gen. Sheridan was sent there, and at
Gov. Kellogg’s request this Legislature
was interfered with and five members
taken out by force. Now if this ean
continue, there, right there is an end of
ADVERTISING KATES.
ter For each square of ten lines or less
for the first insertion, sl, and fo* each sub
sequent insertion, fifty cents.
No.Sq’rs 1 Mo. | 8 Mob jt> Mog I 1 yea£
Two s4.o<r mxr ju.oo $26:60
Four “ 6.00 10.00 18.00 85.00
f column 9.*>o tyS.OO 25.00 40.dC
j “ 15.00 2..00 40.00 05.00
1 “ 25.00 40-C0 65.00 115.00
Ten lines of solid brevier, or it*
e quivalent in spaoe, make a square.
NO. 27,
all independence/ and fonsequefttly of
all power, not only ifi tlfe State
'litres but id State government, for if
the Legislature be not independent thd
State is powerless. It can have no will
except as it expresses it through its leg*
.slature.
Igo on. Now tell me, my friend?;
did they disperse the Louisiana. Lcgis*
lature to save the Union ! Did Durell
pass his midnight order to save the Un
ion ? Did they do it to preserve the
Constitution of the country?
1 hey do it to complete the icork of rc
'•on. -rHc'ion ? Tell me—l appeal to
he intelligence of the American pub
c. toll me why, at this day, the gov
ernment at Washington, the douiinr §
oarty, still finds it necessary to interfile
id control the Legislatures of Sover*
gn Stat ? There is hut one answer
nbe given. It is to enable them to
keep the power in this country in a Seti*
rai government, without regard to the
Constitution of the country, (applause.)
Vow that is bad enough, but I am
dwelling too much, for there is much I
desire to S; y. I want to give you tho
histoiy briefly, and the reasons why the
Constitution violated, so that you
will understand it. You understand
vhy it was unconstitutional for them
thus to interfere in Louisiana. But,
my fiiends, bad as is thi* view, there
is a darker one behind. Do you be*-
l : eve, are you stupid enough to suppose
that this iniquity has been perpetrated
because of any special hatred to Louis
iana? No. It means you; it means
all the Sou,. :rn Slates; it means all
the Union ; and it is iotended as a*blow
at the whole country. This man, Sher
idan, sent a telegiam to Washington
city, and what is in it ? He says that
the spirit of defiance to the law Is un
controllable, and there is but one way
to stop it. He did not say the reaction
was any defiance ; he said but the spV
it of defiance. How Sheridan
read anybody’s spirit, I don’t know j
but mark the language. He is an offi
cer, and a high officer in the United
States army; he says he would sug
gest that Congress pass a law, declar
ing a large portion of the people of
Louisiana, and other States bandiis,
that they might be tried by court mar
tial. And then, as if supposing Con
gress might not be willing to pass such
a law, he said that if the President
would proclaim them bandits, the rest
might be left to him. I will not in
dulge in epithets, but the idea that an
American officer should suggest (ho
thought that citizens could be declared
bandits bv Presidential proclamation,
then tried by him and shot by order of
a court martial! Js it possible for
language to concenlr. te the essence of
tvranny more strongly iu words ?—*
There is nothing, I fearlessly assert, in
the history of Nero or Caligula more
absolutely infamous. There is our
Constitution which our fathers framed,
and which this officer swore to support.
And what does that Constitution say ?
That no person shall be held to answer
for a capital or otherwise infamous
crime, except by indictment or p' ;sent
ment of a grand jury, unless in land or
naval sevvico.
He has requested, in the teeth of
that, that the President shall issue a
proclamation declaring whole clases
criminals, and leave the rest to him,
Sheridan. Then there is another clauso
that every criminal trial shall be by an
impartial jury, and in the State and
district were committed. This propo
sal of Sheridan's strikes down the trial
by jury and subjects the citizen to trial
by court martial. Can the spirit of
bandit be worse ? I am stating the
facts and LelUog you the manner in
which this violates the Constitution.—
This dispatch of Sheridan’s, followed
by his letter of justification, would nofc
of itself amount to anything except to
prove that Sheridan knew nothing
about law and cartd less ; that he knew
nothing about human rights and cared
less; that he knew nothing about the
Constitution of the country and cared
less for his oath to support it. But the
alarming feature is that the President
of the Un : ted States sends in a solemn
official message to Congress wherein,
while he does not declare his wish or
right to issue the proclamation, he yet
absolutely goes into an argument to
justify the dispatch and apologizes for
it on account of what he calls the out
rages in the Southern States. What
greater outrage than this dispatch and
this approval of it can human wicked
ness conceive ? It is the darkest hap
tev in ‘he history of the country which
records that the Executive justifies a
suggestion that citizens be declared ban
dits by Presidential pn clamation, and
tried by court,-mariial in the teeth of
the Constitution, that executive has
sworn to support, protect and defend.
I tell you, it marks the darkest era in
American history. You can never com
prehend fully its danger or its enormi
ty. And he goes so far f.s to say that
he has no doubt that if Congress should
pass a law, as Sheridan suggests, these
troubles by subverting the Constitution.
Secure peace by destroying liberty!
Punish crime by official perjury, through
the assasination of Constitutional gov
ernment ! Who is the rebel ?
Who shows a spirit of defiance to all
law, and a reckless disregard of all
rights ? Sheridan, we are told, is no
lawyer ; neither is Grant. And here is
this great curse of the country, that
men are rushing into high positions
whose duties they do not understand,
and whose responsibilities they do not
regard. We have an age of military
statesmanship, and civil govern moot is
absolutely destroyed, and everything iu
time of peace, in absolute dominion to
military power. A still more alarming
fact is, that their monstrous propositions'
[CONCLUDED ON SECOND PAttE.} 4