Rensselaer Union, Volume 5, Number 35, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 22 May 1873 — Louisiana. [ARTICLE]

Louisiana.

The elements that have been wrought into violence in Louisiana exist in the other Southern States, and ( to an extent sp< cially dangerous in those States wherein, as in Louisiana,' the population is about equally divided between the whites and the blacks. This is the case in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina, and approximately the ease in North Carolina and several other States. It will be remembered that in Georgia the November election left two contesting Legislatures, and that a situation as aggravated as the one in Louisiana was narrowly escaped in that State. Mississippi was also, at one time, in peril of a like condition. In all these States there are to be future elections, under essentially the same circumstances and presenting similar dangers. This view invests the Louisiana broils with an importance- and a signiflcuncy which are not generally realized. The Republican press of the country, with its usual independence, deals to each party in that State the censure that seems to be deserved, and freely criticises all the agencies that have combined to bring the commonwealth into its present predicament. Notably, it unites in condemning the failure of Congress to Settle this question, and calls for moderation, forbearance and the observance of order by the McEnery party. On the other hand, the Democratic press everywhere, with few exceptions'; takesup the hue and cry of those New Orleans exextremists who clamor for an armed resistance to the State administration. The worst that the bitterest Bourbon element of Louisiana can do to call back the demon of bloody discord is applauded to the echo by the Democratic journals of the North. How the Missouri Republican, for instance, tells the mischief-makers that their cause is holy, and urges them to go. to the direst extremities, appears by the following extract from that paper of yesterday: What is it that the people of Louisiana want? They are not hostile to the Federal Government; they have no desire Fedenri-htw* or *et aside the provision* of the Federal “Constitution; they are entirely willing to remain part aiid parcel of the Federal Union, and contribute toita support, but they cannot and will not submit quietly to the infamous usurpation Of Kellogg attd his crew. In exchange for tnia usurpation they would gladly accept a military Governor and martial law; they prefer the stern code of the sword, administered, with equity, to the miserable tyranny of a carpelbag Executive and the black and white adventurers with whom he is surrounded. If Kellogg had been fairly elected he would be bad enough; but when his election is confusedly a farce and a fraud, then to be asked to recognize it is adding insult to injury. The citizens of Missouri or Massachusetts, if placed in the same circumstances as the citizens of Louisiana, would do precisely what they an* doing—resist to the bitter end. In such a ca>c quiet submission can only be expected of slaves; and whatever may be the faults of Louisianans, they are not and cannot be made slaves—because they are Americans; A few facts will expose the gross exaggeration and essential falsehood upon which this incendiary appeal is based. The census of 1870 stated the tion of Louisiana at 362,000 whites and 364,000 blacks. Does the Republican deign to include the latter when it talks of the people of Louisiana? Of course not. Whom does it mean by “they” when it says “they cannot and will not submit to the infamous usurpation of Kellogg and his crew” ? Not the people of Louisiana, but the McEnery party, known as the Fusionists. And yet, taken with this very material modification, -th* statement is false. The Fusionists themselves are very far from including all tile white voters. It is untrue that even the Fusionists, whom alone the Missouri Republican recognizes as “the citizens of Louisiana,” are, as a party, “resisting the Kellogg Government to the bitter end.” And if, as the Republican intimates, the failure to make such resistance “can only be expected of the slaves,” then the mass of the very class whom our neighbor designates as exclusively “the citizens of Louisiana,” are no better in this respect than slaves. The fire-eating Bourbonsof New Orleans are already telling them as much, and can now quote the Missouri ' Republican as proof. At a public meeting of the Fusionists in New Orleans, oji the sth instant, a speech was made by one of the leaders, Mr. Campbell, whom the Herald, a Fusion organ, reports to this effect: Mr. Campbell, being called upon, arose, and was received with shouts. He started out boldly by telling the people of New Orleans that they had not kept their promises; that they promised to stand by Governor McEnery : that all the parishes had done.the same. Still, what had been the result? The people of New Orleans had failed in their promises and so had nearly all the parishes. -But one remained true la Ilnur promise*, it was St. Marfin. lie blamed the people severely for their want of firmness and resolution, especially in allowing these armed police forces, paid by ourselves, to go to St. Martin and kill and burn , the properties of those the ground of whose offending was keeping their word like men. In answer to the cry “Give us a leader.” he flatly told them that it was* in themselves the fault lay and not on the part of a leader. Here is conclusive evidence that the policy of “resistance to the bitter end” drags heavily, even amon* those whom Mr. Campbell and his St. Louis coadjutor graciously regard as alone “the people.” The truth clearly is that the violent resistance is not a spontaneous popular movement, but the ebullition of a few desperate jnen, who are trying “to fire the Southern; heart,” and whom the Democratic press is as insaneljf ready -to help in the work, reckless of consequences, as it ever was. The same sulphurous organ which reports Mr. Campbell as above says, editorially: Many of our thrifty a'nd peace-loving citizens have been deceived and misled by reports that fair and just compromises, to settle the political turmoil in tliis been made and sanctioned by Kellogg^-but<iefeaUMi4)-y4l4e“perverj&y-and-im-practicability of our own people. All say, “Give us a compromise, let not the State perish for a mere political squabble. Let us yield to a certain amount of plundering, and accept the situation. provided 'We can save something, how little soever.” • This is the pet notiori of many citizens, who are thoroughly disgusted with the constant trouble, excitement and vast injury io every interest of the State from our present political chaos. These “many citizens” are right. Their spirit is that of common sense. It is excesshely foolish and unutterably wicked to initiate or encourage a civil war in Louisiana. .The only possible outcome of it would be business and financial ruin, devastation of property, massacres of citizens, and the call upon the United States Government to interfere, resulting in making, the so-called “infamous usurpation” supreme and more powerful than ever. Incidentally, it is possible that the flames of a race conflict might extend toother States, with like precious blessings and not a dissimilar result. If all this shall not happen, it will not be because the Democratic leaders. North and South, are not zealously doing their part Joward it, but because reflecting Southern Democrats, having once been bitterly deceived by such counselors as the Missouri jKc'ptz4Zteiui,..have had quiff-enough, of their ; advice.” • Candor should compel the admission of the historic facts in the Louisiana case. The time for partisan half-statement in so serious a matter has passed. A United States law, enacted under the late amendments, is the authority by- which the returns purporting the election of McEnery were set aside. This fact should be stated when the wholesale charge of force apd fraud is made. Tlie Durell decision was a construction of that law by a tribunal which the Supreme Court of the Uqitjed States has decided to have had full, legal jurisdiction in the case. So far the fact's. Why should they be persistently ignored in the history of anarchy? Let "them be recognized as often as the Durell decision is arraigned as Louie Globe, May 10. .