, crv-CL4/M4'^C/^ 
 
 1S75. 
 
 iJj IaA^ ^umxAA^OMXiX 
 
SELF-GOVERNMENT IN LOUISIANA. 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 OF t- 
 
 n 
 
 HOK J. R. WEST, 
 
 jOF LOUISIANA, 
 
 UNITED STATES SENATE, 
 
 FEBRUARX 1, 1875. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 
 
 1875. 
 
N 
 
 *w \ 
 
 V 
 
 % ^ • 
 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 HON. J. E. WEST 
 
 The Senate haying under consideration the resolution submitted by Mr. Schuez 
 on the 8th of January, directing the Committee on the Judiciary to" inquire what 
 legislation is necessary to secure to the people of the State of Louisiana tneir rights 
 of self-government under the Constitution — 
 
 Mr. WEST said : 
 
 Mr. President : Having already had one, tliougli a brief, oppor- 
 tunity of addressing the Senate on the pending question, on which 
 occasion I pointed out how tlie laws and the constitution of Louisiana 
 had been violated in the pretended organization made under Mr. 
 Wiltz on the 4th of last month, I feel some hesitation in again claim- 
 ing the attention of the Senate, and must plead as an apology for so 
 doing that I consider there are yet some features in the case that 
 have not been examined and which it will be well to scrutinize. 
 The views that I shall express to-day will therefore have at least the 
 merit of novelty, and though I shall not be able altogether to avoid 
 traveling in some of the sufficiently well-trodden paths of others who 
 have preceded me, yet I can promise not to weary those who will 
 honor me with their attention, unnecessarily to the positions that I 
 shall assume. 
 
 I propose to show from some of the pages of the recent but appar- 
 ently forgotten history of Louisiana, that had it been designed by 
 the United States authorities to overthrow constitutional govern- 
 ment in that State and to establish military despotism in its place, 
 there have been other and earlier opportunities of doing so. After 
 I have spread that page before you I shall proceed to, an examina- 
 tion of a report of a recent superficial inquiry into the affairs of Lou- 
 isiana, and shall endeavor to show that a dociiment which is freely 
 quoted by our opponents in this Chamber as completely confounding 
 the views of repnblicans here, and as convincingly unanswerable, is 
 simply a copy of a democratic White League brief that deals with 
 propositions at variance with its own facts and presents conclusions 
 without evidence to sustain them. 
 
 Mr. President, it is an axiom that " history repeats itself." Events 
 that are transpiring in Louisiana to-day, and that have transpired in 
 the past month, are not a repetition of history, but rather a continu- 
 ation of an unbroken chronicle of outrage and of wrong ever since 
 that State was admitted to the Union under reconstruction. I would 
 ask the Senate to go back with me to an incident that occurred prior 
 to the Administration of the present Chief Executive, in which the 
 military authority was interposed under somewhat similar circum- 
 stances to those of the recent action that has been so elaborately dis- 
 cussed here. 
 
In 1863 one xmiversal scene of violence, nninlov, and killing pre- 
 vailed tlirougbout that State to sucli an extent that the State au- 
 thorities deemed themselves powerless to tiup]»ress those disorders, 
 and the governor of the State appealed under the Constitution to 
 the Federal Government for its interposition. I read from the testi- 
 mony taken in the Louisiana contested cases in 18G8, in -which the 
 governor of that State — a governor wliose title has never been (jues- 
 tioned, and who met no opposition to his authority in consequence of 
 any illegality or insufbcieucy of title — that governor, I say, ad- 
 dressed to the military reprcseutative of the Uiuted States in New- 
 Orleans this request : 
 
 General : The evidence is rnndusivc that the civil anthorilies in the parishes of 
 Orleans, Jefferson, and Saint F.eruard are unable to jneserve order and protect the 
 lives and property of the lunple. 
 
 The act of Coniri-ess i)roliiliitins the organization of militia in this State strips 
 me of all power to sustain them in the discharge of their duties, and I am com- 
 pelled to appeal to you to take charge of the peace of these parishes and use your 
 forces to that end. 
 
 If you respoud favorably to my request, I will at once order the sheriffs and 
 police forces to report to you for orders. 
 
 Very respectfiillv, your obedient servant, 
 
 H. c. war:moth. 
 
 Governor of Louisiana. 
 The general commanding, concluding very properly that such an 
 appeal should be made to the Chief Executive, transmitted that ap- 
 peal to Washington, aud was replied to as follows : 
 
 War DErARTMKXT, 
 
 Washinf/ton, October 26, 18G8. 
 Brevet Major-General L. H. Kosseau, 
 
 Commanding Department of Louisiana, New Orleans: 
 Tour dispatch of the 26th, forwarding a message from the governor of Louisi- 
 ana, and asking instructions, has been received. You are authorized and expected 
 to take such action as maybe necessary to preserve the peace and good order, and 
 to protect the lives and property of citizens. 
 
 J. M. SCHOFIELD, 
 
 Secretary of War. 
 
 General Eosscau, who was then in command, on the 28th day of 
 October, 18G8, issued this proclamation to the citizens of New Orleans : 
 Headquarters Department of Louisiana, 
 
 (St.\tes of Louisiana and Arkansas,) 
 Neiu Orleans, Louisiana, October W, 1868. 
 To the people of Keiv Orleans: 
 
 Tellow-citizens: I have received instructions from the authorities at Wash- 
 ington to take such action as may be necessary to preserve peace aud good order, 
 and to protect the lives and property of citizens. 
 
 So far the requisition upon the President of the United States and 
 the action of those in authority under him was entirely legitimate. 
 But the military commander saw proper to take certain action which 
 is as completely a violation of the law in the ca.se as we have had 
 illustrated to us here in any action in the more recent case. It would 
 seem that that military commander should have acted in co-operation 
 with the State authorities ; but he absolutely moved directly and with- 
 out recognizing those authorities and reorganized the police board in 
 the city of New Orleans, as the record shows. Here was a State then 
 admitted to full recognition in the Federal Union, represented on this 
 floor by two Senators aud at the other end of the Capitol by its com- 
 petent representation; aud yet on the direction that the military 
 authorities there should take' such action as would preserve the peace, 
 they to a certain extent superseded the goverumeut, and acted without 
 its recognition and against its inclinations. 
 
Now, sir, I shall recur to the cliaroe made in the words of the Sen- 
 ator from Ohio, [Mr. Thurma^^.] He said: 
 
 The great tlie.mo which now engages the American Senate is that great qnestion 
 of constitutional law, whether constitutional government shall be preserved in this 
 land or military despotism take its place. 
 
 The specification of that charge has been furnished us through the 
 information that his resolution elicited, and th.it specification is that 
 General De Trobriand, acting at the request of Governor Kellogg— a 
 request made in obedience to an apiieal of fifty-two members, a 
 majority of the Legislature then in the process of assembling, and 
 upon the judgment of that governor that he had exhausted all the 
 State resources at his command to suppress a then formidable move- 
 ment of domestic violence — prostrated the civil institutions of that 
 State to Federal military power, and imperiled the liberties of forty 
 millions of jieople. It is nowhere admitted — on the contrary, it is 
 emphatically denied — that this action emanated fi-om the President 
 of the Uuite'd States, or that he can in any degree be held responsible 
 for it; and in support of that proposition I want to recur to another 
 page of Louisiana history, showing what the President of the L^^nited 
 States is inclined to do when he is compelled to act and when he has 
 the proper information at his command. 
 
 I told the Senate that I should recur to some incidents of Louisi- 
 ana history that had apparently escaped their recollection. Do they 
 remember' that just precisely three j'eai's preceding the events that 
 have created so much excitement and which have been the^ subject of 
 this discussion — precisely to a day three years before these events 
 transpired we had another event somewhat analogous in character, 
 and the action had was entirely ditierent ? . On the 4th of January, 
 1875, General De Trobriand, at the request of a democratic (so called) 
 speaker of the house, came to his relief. On the 4th of January, 1S72, 
 a conspiracy, entered into in the Legislature of Louisiana by a minor- 
 ity of democrats, temi^orarily overthrew that house, and when their 
 plans were foiled they appealed to the military to abolish and anni- 
 hilate that house. The Legislature of Louisiana was in session on 
 the 4th day of January", 1872. A minority of the house, having cer- 
 tain projects and jdans, took occasion to secure the temporary control 
 of the hoitse by the very questionable measure which I will now re- 
 cite to the Senate. At twelve o'clock on the 4th day of January, 
 1872, the governor of the State, the lieutenant-goveruoi', four mem- 
 bers of the senate, and eighteen members of the house, all of them 
 opponents of the speaker and his combination — 
 
 Were arrested by United States deputy marshals on writs issued by United States 
 Commissioner AYoollley, who was till recently a cleik or deputy under Marshal 
 Packard, on the false and fiivolous charge that they were conspiiiug to resist the 
 execution of the laws of the United States. 
 
 While most of these members were absent at the custom-house, they were delayed 
 by the commissioner, on the pretense that he had no blank bonds, and had sent for 
 some. Having been detained for a considerable time, they were finally released, 
 and returned to the State-house. When they returned they found that seven 
 republicans had been unseated, and six democrats and custom-house republicans 
 had been seated in their places, while one, the .seat of Mr. Souer, of Avoyelles, was 
 left vacant. This was done with only fifty-one members present, including the 
 speaker. 
 
 The clerk of the house in this same document testifies : 
 
 On each question the same number of votes were cast, and there were during the 
 
 transaction of all this business only fifty members present besides the speaker. 
 Acci>rding to the constitution and pi'actice of the house, fifty-two members were 
 
 necessary for a quorum, there being one hundred and two actual members of the 
 
 house of representatives. 
 
6 
 
 Yovi will see that on this earlier occasion a niiiiority proceotle.il 
 without authority of law to clisorgauize ii Legislature of Louisiana. 
 That uiovenicnt was counteracted by the governor of the State issu- 
 ing a proclamation that same afternoon reconvening the Legislature, 
 getting a full (luorum, expunging what had been done during the 
 day, and unseating the members who had been guilty of this viola- 
 tion of the laws and the constitution. Then ensued a scene of con- 
 fusion, complication, and disorder that put to the extreme test the 
 powers of the executive of that State to maintain his position. 
 
 On the 5th of January, the following day, the governor of Louisi- 
 ana telegraphed to me here in these words : 
 
 The condition of aflairs is that of insurrection, and I want President Grant to 
 instruct General Emory to use his whole force to assist me in suppressing it, and 
 to answer me whether no will do so — either yes or no. 
 
 I did not regard that application as made in accordance with the 
 Constitution, and I replietl to the governor as follows : 
 
 Dispatch for President received this niorninj; and forwarded. It occurs to mc 
 that you assume a false position in asking United States troops to suppress any 
 insurrectionary or riotous movement until you have exhausted the power of the 
 State ; meanwhile the Federal troops should not molest you. 
 
 As I remember, no effectual applications w^ere subsequently made by 
 the governor of that State for any such military interference. ' But I will 
 proceed and show who did make applications of that character, and 
 how inconsistent those applications are with the position that the same 
 gentlemen occupy at the present time. The democracy of the State, 
 speaking through its authorized body, the executive political com- 
 mittee of the State, the democratic members of the bar of Louisiana , 
 the democratic press, the democratic mass-meetings, the democratic 
 judges upon the bench, besought the President to use the military 
 power of the United States to disperse tliat Legislature. Judges T. 
 Wharton Collins, of the seventh district court, William H. Cooley, of 
 the sixth district court, and the judges of the second and fourth dis- 
 trict courts appealed to the President of the United States to declare 
 martial law and disperse that assemblage. The C(dlector of the port 
 of New Orleans, the relative and personal friend of the President, 
 made a like appeal ; the United States marshal made a similar appeal ; 
 the editor of the New Orleans Bee, the leading democratic organ, the 
 expelled members of the Legislature, made a like appeal ; the mayor 
 of the city appealed. I repeat, the executive committee of the State 
 central committee of the democratic party asked for the intervention 
 of Federal troops to abolish and disperse a Legislature the legality of 
 which there was no question about. The leading democratic paper 
 in an article asked for martial law. The meml)ers of the bar of the 
 city of New Orleans asked for martial law ; the citizens in mass-meet- 
 ing assembled, and Louis A. Wlltz as one of them, your outraged and 
 violated speaker who now complains of the interposition of the Army 
 of the United States, asked the President to interx)Osc and expel mem- 
 bers from the Legislature. 
 
 Let us contrast the dit'terence between that occasion and tliis, botli 
 with respect to what I have stated and with respect to the informa- 
 tion that was in the hands of the President, and the solicitation to 
 which he was subjected. His political friends — the governor of the 
 State, the judges on the bench, the democratic State central com- 
 mittee, the democrats generally in mass-meeting assembled — appealed 
 for the interposition of military authority. And what was the answer 
 of the President of the United States ? Because thoroughly informed 
 (which he was not, nor were any pains taken to inform him of the 
 recent action) of this situation, not yielding to the solicitation of 
 
«itlier his i)olitical friends or his political adversaries, with telegrams 
 incessantly pouring upon him to the number of fourteen, he makes 
 but one answer, and the record of it should not be forgotten — 
 Troops cannot bo used except under provisions of law 
 
 That was the answer of the President of the United States when 
 he was asked to interfere, and he is in no way responsible that his 
 subordinates have on a different occasion taken a difterent view of 
 their duty. He knew what the circumstances were ; that community 
 laid them completely and clearly before him. He could not reconcile 
 it to his sense of constitutional duty to interpose in the organization of 
 a Legislature. Not only was that his view at that time, but there is 
 abundant evidence in the message he has sent to us, and there is also 
 corroborating evidence in the manner in which the officers on duty 
 there construed his dispatches and their instructions, to show that 
 the military interposed with extreme reluctance and only for the 
 ultimate preservation of peace and good order. The President say 
 in his message : 
 
 I did not knowtbat any sucb tbing was anticipated, and no orders nor sugges- 
 tions were ever given to any military officer in tbat State upon tbat subject prior 
 to the occuiTence. 
 
 T have no desire to have United States troops interfere in the domestic concerns 
 of Louisiana or any other State. 
 
 On the 9tb of December last Governor Kellogg telegraphed to me his apprehen- 
 sions tbat the White League intended to make another attack upon the State-house, 
 to which on the same day I made the following answer, siuce which no communica- 
 tion has been sent to him : * 
 
 "Tour dispatch of this date just received. It is exceedingly unpalatable to use 
 troops in anticipation of danger. Let the State authorities be right, and then pro- 
 ceed with their duties without apprehension of danger. If they are then molested, 
 the question will be determined whether the United States is able to maintain law 
 a.nd order within its limits or not." 
 
 I have deplored the necessity which seemed to make it my duty under the Con- 
 stitution and laws to direct such interference. I have always refused, except where 
 it seemed to be my imperative dutj-, to act in sucb a manner under the Constitution 
 and laws of the United States. 
 
 Now, if there is one officer more than another in Louisiana who is 
 peculiarly obnoxious to our friends on the other side of this Cham- 
 ber it is Major Lewis Merrill, the officer that a Senator here a few 
 days ago without any warrant asserted was under arrest on the 
 charge of arresting and handcuffing civilians. I protested against 
 that charge at that time, because, although I could not refute it, I 
 did not believe it was true ; and the Senator did not have the infor- 
 mation, but he asserted most positively that Major Merrill was under 
 arrest. I desire to call the attention of the Senate to the disposition 
 of that man, or rather to his conception of what his military duties 
 are, and I will read briefly from his report : 
 
 The general purpose of having the troops stationed here, I take it, I correctly 
 understand in believing it to be to maintain, first, as far as possible, by moral in- 
 fluence, and in the last extremity, if needful, by physical force, the supremacy of 
 the civil law. I further suppose' myself right ill assuming that every officer charged 
 with any duty in this disturbed coiintry should carefully and steadily keep in view 
 the fact that every power of moral suasion, and every influence toward a peaceful 
 settlement of the disturbances, should be exhausted before he would be justified in 
 even a show of physical force ; that it is his duty, first and last, to make conspicu- 
 ous the fact that the military are here only to sustain the law and to assist the 
 proper officers in enforcing it ; that the community is not in a state of war ; and that 
 in all respects the usual functions of the civil law are to be appealed to for pro- 
 tection before any rightful use of the military can be made. 
 
 As an earnest of that officer's disposition to in no case interpose 
 the military arm of the Government in conflict with the civil au- 
 thority, even when that civil authority was exerted against one of 
 
tlic iiionibcis of iiis own force, one of the members ■who was activo 
 in his ettbrts to suppress viok'ncc, I will read from some of the tele- 
 grams which passed between Major Merrill and some of his subordi- 
 nates. One of Major Merrill's otiflcers was arrested by a process from 
 one of the State courts. An attorney at laAv practicing in that court 
 Avas employed to defend him. There were some preliminary examin- 
 ations, and presently the question got into the hands of the grand 
 jury. The attorney who Avas defending the officer telegraphed to 
 Major Merrill, intiyiating that pending the issuance of the warrant 
 under such an indictment the officer might make his escape. That same 
 idea seems to have been suggested to the other military officers who 
 were there in the immediate presence and neighborhood of that court, 
 and they also intimated to their commander, then at Shreveport, that 
 evasion of that w^it might be had by flight or by force. Major Mer- 
 rill replied : 
 
 Let the warrant be served and obeyed. 
 
 And in reporting to his more immediate commander at Xew Orleans, 
 he said : 
 
 That grand Jury have foiuid indictment against Hodgson, and warrant will bo 
 served to-iuonow luoraing. Have ordered positividy that there shall be no evasion 
 or iuterferonee with legal proceedings ; that warrant must be answered quietly 
 " without any evasion whatever." 
 
 Mr. President, after the instances we have had recounted to us in 
 this Chambi-r of the safety and securitj' with which this Government 
 has tided along until now near the completion of a century, over the 
 varied encroachments, if I may so express it, of the military upon 
 the civil power; after the episode of Jackson in 1815, the arrest of a 
 member of the IjCgislature, and the ignoring of a writ of habeas 
 corpus ; after the dispersion of the Kansas Legislature in 18.56 by 
 Federal authority; after the capture of the Maryland Legislature in 
 1861 ; after the assumption in 1868 of military control of a State in 
 full fraternity in this Union ; after the appeal by the democratic party 
 and tlic democratic masses of Louisiana for Federal interposition and 
 for the dispersion of a legal Legislature of that State in 1872, are we 
 to be told that the pillars of constitutional liberty should tremble 
 because under the orders of a governor of a State the military inter- 
 posed and ejected I'rom the Legislature some men that had no particle 
 of tith; to bo there ? It is a mere sham i»ietensiou that such danger 
 should be a])prehended. 
 
 After live years of war, Avhen the troops laid down their arms, this 
 "imperious and ambitious" C;esar disbanded all his great hosts after 
 having with a generosity that cojumanded the admiration of the 
 world p.iroled tlio hostile forces; and adjuring them to the arts of 
 peace baih' thiMu return to their homes and gave them assurance that 
 they .slumld not be molested. I should like to have read the terms of 
 surrender jut>t c( rtitied to me by the War Department, as between 
 General Lee and (ieueral Grant. 
 
 The Chief Clerk read as follows: 
 
 AlTOMArrOX COLltX-HoUSE, VUiCINIA, 
 
 April n, 18C5. 
 General: in accordance with the substance of my letter to you of the 8th 
 instant, 1 propose to receive the surrender of tlic army of Koitlurn Virginia ou 
 the following terms, to wit: ItoUs of all the oHioers and men to bo niadie in dupli- 
 cate, one copy to be given to an otiicer to be designated by me, the other to bo 
 retained by .such oflieir or officers as you may dcsigtiate. The officers to give their 
 individual paroles not to take up arms against llu> Government of the United 
 States until properly exchanged ; and each company or regimental commander to 
 sign a like ^tarole for tli(< men of their commands. TIio arms, artillery, and public 
 property to be parked and stacked, and turned over to the officers appointed by me 
 
to receive them. This will not embrace the side-arms of tlie otficers, nor their pri 
 vate horses or baggage. This done, eacli otlieer aud man will be allowed to return 
 to his home, not to be disturbed by United States authority so long as they observe 
 their paroles and the laws in force whore they may re.si<le. 
 
 ^ U. S. GRANT, 
 
 Lieutenant-General. 
 General R. E. Lee. 
 
 Headquarters Army Northern Vikgisia, 
 
 April 9, 1865. 
 Genekal: I have received your letter of this date containing the terms of .sur- 
 leniler of the army of Northern Virginia, as proposed by you. As they are sub- 
 stantially the same as those expressed in your letter of the 8th instant, they are 
 accepted. I will pioceed to designate the proper otiicers to carry the stipulations 
 into effect. 
 
 K. E. LEE, 
 General. 
 LieuteuantGoneral U. S. Grant. 
 
 VTAR DEPAHT.MKXT, ADJLTAXT-GESEItAL'S OFFICE, 
 
 Washington, February 1, 1875. 
 Official copy. 
 
 E. D. TOWNSEND, 
 
 Adjutant-General. 
 
 Mr. WEST. All the history of General Grant's action, either ^s 
 soldier or civilian, refutes even the snpposition that he would ever 
 seek by force to subvert the principles of constitutional government 
 to a military despotism. The democracy needed some such sham as 
 tliis to delude the judgment of the peox)le in their reflection upon 
 their late remissness. They knew that when the people oame to re- 
 flect upon the possibility of the non-cocrcionists again obtaining 
 power, they would shrink from such a consummation. A magnificent 
 vista of coming power has dazzled the vision of some presidential 
 a.spirants; but thej' will find that the attempt to make the people of 
 this country believe that the man who led the hosts of freedom is 
 now seeking to throttle their liberties, is " the airiest bublde that ever 
 tilled " either '• an emptj' head," or a head overcrowded with ambi- 
 tion. 
 
 I will digress now to say a few words in regard to an attack made 
 ui>on the supreme court of my State. It has been stated that the 
 personnel of that court was bad, and in support of that statement a 
 decision has been cited of the Supreme Court of the United States 
 recently rendered. That decision is not yet final, an a])plication for 
 a rehearing having been made by Mr. Eeverdy Johnson and Judge 
 IJlack on the ground, among others, that the court had misappre- 
 hended the facts of the case ; and the presumption is that such emi- 
 nent counsel would not apply for a rehearing in a case in which they 
 had not been jireviously engaged unless there were reasonable 
 grounds therefor. Under the circumstances, fair play and common 
 tlecency would require that the decision should not be discussed in 
 deliberative assemblies. 
 
 lu much of the discussion in regard to Louisiana afftiirs the su- 
 preme bench of Louisiana has come in for a liberal share of repre- 
 hension. I want to show to the Senate who these men are that are 
 so generally condemned here on ex parte testimonj^. To demonstrate 
 how the chief justice of that State is regarded, in 1872 after he had 
 been on the bench four years, and during the sitting of the demo- 
 cratic convention which nominated Colonel John McEnery for gov- 
 ernor of the State, and in which convention he was a delegate, aud 
 the governor that was afterward nominated by that convention, 
 McEnery, telegraphed to the chief justice of the State, Judge Lude- 
 ling, to know if he would accei)t the nomination of that conven- 
 tion for the office of governor. That honor was declined. Later the 
 
Id 
 
 delegatoa from several pari.shes to the ]il)eral eouvoiitioii which nom- 
 inated Colonel Pcun for governor met at Monroe during the session 
 of the supreme court, and after consultation they asked the chief 
 justice if ho wonUl accept the nomination for governor from that 
 convention, and this honor also lie declined. The facts in connec- 
 tion with the case decided hy the Supreme Court of the United States 
 ■were known to those delegates, as they lived in the neighborhood of 
 the raih'oad which is the subject of that litigation, and among them 
 were leading lawyers in that portion of the State. It is not anuss to 
 state that in 1866 Judge I^ndeliug and some of his fellow-citizens 
 l^urchased at a ])ublic sale the wreck of a railroad. Their title was 
 iittackcd in the State courts, and both the district court and the su- 
 preme court of the State decided that their title was valid. Another 
 suit was then filed in the circuit court of the Uuited States attack- 
 ing the sale. The circuit court decided in favor of the sale, and the 
 Supreme Court has recently reversed that decision ; but an applica- 
 tion for a rehearing is still pending in that case as already stated. 
 
 An allusion has been made here to a dispatch sent by Colonel 
 Qasey, as if he knew or could foreshadow the opinion of the supreme 
 court in its coming decision to be rendered on the returning-board 
 case. Nobody but Colonel Casey is responsible for that dispatch. 
 At the date of the dispatch he was not even acquainted Avith the 
 members of the supreme court. The supreme court had refused to 
 recoguize the commission of Ogden as attorney-general, on the 
 ground that it was issued in violation of law, having been issued 
 before the cauA'ass of the votes by either of the returning boards : 
 and that probably was the basis of tlie conjecture on which Colonel 
 Casey concluded that the supreme court of that State was in har- 
 mony with the republican jiarty. 
 
 lu'auswer to the attack of Senators on the pcrsonnd of the other 
 members of that court, I shall be excnsed for stating briefly who 
 those gentlemen are who, without a hearing, are being condemned 
 aud denounced here. 
 
 The chief justice is a native of Louisiana, a man Avho has spent 
 his whole life in that State, and up to this time without blemish or 
 the slightest suspicion of disrepute. Those tAvo conventicms were 
 composed of his life-long fellow-citizens. Those men that except to 
 his rulings noAV as chief justice of the supreme court Avere jierfectly 
 willing and indeed anxious that he should become the chief execu- 
 tive of their party and of their people and of their State. 
 
 Mr. Justice Taliaferro is a native of Virginia; during many years 
 parish judge under the constitution of 1812. In 18.52 he Avas a mem- 
 ber of the constitutional convention w'hich met in that year. In 
 1861 he was elected as a Union man to the secession convention. He 
 was one of seven of all the Union men elected to that convention 
 who had the courage to refuse to sign the ordinance of secession. In 
 1868 he was elected to the constitutional convention, of which he 
 was the president ; and he Avas the democratic candidate for governor 
 in 1868 in opposition to Governor Warmoth. He is noAV nearly seventy- 
 seven years of age, and all his life he has borne an unblemished repu- 
 tation. 
 
 Mr. Justice IIoAvell is also a natiA^c of Louisiana. He Avas several 
 times elected to the otlice of district judge before the war. In 1864 
 he was a delegate to the constitutional convention, and in 1864 he 
 Avas appointed a justice of the supremo court, and in 1868 he was re- 
 appointed to the same office. He also is regarded as a man of unim- 
 peachable integrity. 
 
11 
 
 Mr. Justice Moi'giin is a native of tlie State. Diiriug several years 
 before the war he was judge of the second district court in New Or- 
 leans, and was afterward district attorney for the United States at 
 New Orleans. He ranked among tlie foremost lawyers at the bar. 
 Mr. Justice Wyly is a native of Tennessee, who had a large and 
 lucrative practice in the country after the war, and in 1868 was 
 elected district judge, and afterward appointed to the supreme court. 
 
 So all these attacks made upon the supreme court of Louisiana are 
 made upon men who are known and have lived there their lifetimes; 
 and because they have the independence to construe the law accord- 
 ing to their consciences and their judgment and their oaths, they are 
 subjected to denunciations unheard of elsewhere outside of Louisi- 
 ana and certainly that ought not to be indulged in here. 
 
 Now, Mr. President, I will claim the attention of the members of 
 the Senate to some of the proceedings had in the so-called investiga- 
 tion of tlie atiairs of Louisiana, and the record of which proceedings 
 is quoted here with such evident satisfaction by our friends on the 
 other side of the Chamber. 
 
 In an official report which we have here, the committee state that 
 they undertook no investigation of the election of 1872. They an- 
 nounced this, and that they would therefore first proceed to an ex- 
 amination of the acts of the returning board of the State in respect 
 to the late election, and then to an inquiry in reference to the White 
 League. That was the notice given out to tlie contending parties in 
 issue before that committee as to the line and scoi>e of their pro- 
 ceedings. That they departed from that line and that they extended 
 that scope without fair notice to one of the conteuding parties will 
 be made apparent as I proceed 
 
 The committee in its report first takes exception to the composition 
 of that board, and says that the law provides that it shall consist of 
 five j)ersons from all iiolitical parties, and asserts that it consisted at 
 the opening of the last session of five republicans, and that one of 
 them, General Longstreet, resigned, and a conservative was taken to 
 fill the vacancy. Well, sir, a man is no longer a democrat in Louisi- 
 ana unless he is willing to be a white-leaguer. I hold the official re- 
 port of that returning board here, and I will state the composition of 
 that body : 
 
 That five persons, to bo elected by tlie senate from all political parties, shall be 
 the returning officers of all elections. 
 
 The board was elected in January, 1873. 
 
 At the time this election took place the party nomenclature of this State was re- 
 publican, democrat, and liberal republican. 
 
 J. Madison Wells then represented the liberal republican party, T. C. Anderson 
 the conservative party, James Longstreet, G. Casanave, and L. M. Kenner the 
 republican party. 
 
 Until the final conclusion of the labors of that board J. Madison 
 Wells, the liberal, T. C. Anderson, the conservative, and Oscar Arroyo 
 the democrat constituted a majority of that board, and there were 
 but two genuine republicans on it. 
 
 Mr. PEATT. By whom was that board appointed ? 
 
 Mr. WEST. That board was elected by the senate of the Legisla- 
 ture. So, as I said in the outset, this repSrt dealt with propositions 
 at variance with its own facts ; and then the committee proceed to 
 say that they think the law as to the constitution of the board was 
 not complied with because the democratic member on the last day 
 of the session withilrew and left them, as they said, without a repre- 
 sentative. I do not think that proposition is exactly sound ; but I 
 
12 
 
 ■svaut to show what tlioso goulk'nien wlio take exception to tliat action 
 (lid in a somewhat similar case when they were left in tlii; vocativo 
 by some of therepnldican members of a board retirintr a little earlier, 
 in 1H7;?. Another senate — because w(! run a double-headed macliino 
 doAvn in Louisiana sometimes; sometimes a conllict lietween Federal 
 and State antbority, and sometimes a contlict between State autliori- 
 ties— a little earlier in It^J'.i a rump legislature that sat at one time 
 in the ui>i)er story of an oyster-saloon in New Orleans elected a return- 
 ing boartl to canvass the votes of that State. They elected Archibald 
 Mitchell, B. K. Formau, S. M. Thomas, O. F. Hnusacker, and S. M. 
 Todd; five men. What the politics of the first three are I cannot say 
 in the confusit)n down tliere between conservatives, white-leaguers, 
 and democrats. All I know is that they were not republicans; but 
 the other two men, O. F. Hunsacker and S. M. Todd, Jiad always been 
 classed as republicans, and had been elected as republicans to tlio 
 senate. That board assumed to convene, and in less than twelve 
 hours after it was created it presumed to count the votes of over six 
 hundred Yiolling-places in the State of Louisiana and to transmit 
 them to the secretary of state as the true and lawful and correct 
 result of tlie election just previously held. I say presumed to trans- 
 mit tliem, because I h()ld in my hand a copy of tlie attidavit of two 
 members of that, board that they never signed that report: that they 
 never examined or compiled those returns, and the whole foumlation 
 made by the Senate Committee on I'rivilegi's ami Eh ctions on the 
 returns of the board of Louisiana, upon which tlie claim of Mr. Mc- 
 Enery is based, is proved hei"e to have been a fraiul and forgery, and 
 the case is without foundation utterly. I will have that atiidavit 
 read so that it can be seen that the great returns which are so often 
 claimed here as the basis for the legitimacy of the McEnery govern- 
 ment are i^roved to have been forged or signed only by two members 
 of the returning board; and the third democrat stands reaily and 
 does say to day that he never signed them. I will read the atiidavit : 
 Sworn Htatenipiit of OscaiF. Itnnsnker, chainnan of tlio fusion-Warmoth rclnriiiiij; 
 
 board, and Samnel M. Todd, a member of the same board. (See canvass of fusion 
 
 returns iiu\)lisli('(l in Senate report, pa^cs 81, S% and irii, purporting to bave been 
 
 signed by llunsaker and Todd.) 
 State ok Lolis^iaxa, 
 
 Citu of Xcw Orleans: 
 
 This dav personally a])pearod before nie, William Grant, TJnited State.s commis- 
 sioner Sai'uuel :M. Toild and Osear F. Huusaker, residents of tbe State of Louisiana, 
 who, beinir liist duly swoin, depose and say: That they were members of the State 
 .senate of llie State of Louisiana, sitting in'the Mechanics' Institute on the iltb day 
 of Decemlxr, l^;-."; that afterward, to wit, en or about tbe indi chiy of l)ecend>er, 
 1872, .said deponents left the senate sittiuu at llu' Mi-<-liauies' rustiliite, and united 
 with the assiMublaue known as tbe McEnery senale, sitiiug at Ly<eum Hall, in tlio 
 city hall buibling of tbe city of New Orleans; tliat tbe senate of the said .MeKn.-ry 
 assenib]auepr(ieecdedtooi:Iani/.e,andthat ouerabout tbe date last named said smate 
 ]>rocee(led toeb ct a reluniing board or board of eauvassers, who were toeorreet, can- 
 vass, and comiiile tiu' returns of election for State olliceis, presidential ebctors, i:e., 
 under tbe act apimived by 11. C. Warmoth November •,'(), IHT-J: and sai<l deponents, 
 to w it, S. M. 'J'odd aTid ().' F. llunsaker, toffetber w itb S. M. Thomas, U. M. Furman, 
 and Archibahl Mitchell, were eb'ct.'d as .said board; that the .said board ])roeeeded 
 to organize by tbe election of (). F. llunsaker, oiu' ol said de])oneuts, ])rcsident 
 thereof; that the sai(l^-eturns were then produced from trunks and carpetbags in 
 a small room, on an ujiper Moor of tbe Saiut Charles Hotel ; that said returns were 
 brought to said room by oueT). D. Bragdon, who ap)>eared to be in possession of 
 tbe .same ; that said returns had been opened, conii)iled, and canvassed before they 
 came into tbe possession of said dep(meuts and tbe other nu'uibers of tbe board ; that 
 although saiil deponents did carefully examine said returns and made themselves 
 cognizant of the nature of llu' same aiid the moileand manner in which saiil returns 
 were comjdled, and tberi'snlt sought to V)e shown, yet said deponents, neither jointly 
 nor separately nor in any way whatever, .signeil or authorized any per.son to sign 
 for them tbepurportid ianviiss of returns known in the congressional report on 
 
Tjouisiiina affairs as tlie "Fornian returns," dated December 11, 1872, by whicb re- 
 turns it waa made to appear tliat John McEuery was elected governor and that the 
 fusion State ticket was elected ; neither did they or either of them at any time 
 consent or agree that said purported canvass was or is correct, or authorize the 
 publication of the same in any manner whatsoever ; that soon after the meeting of 
 said board of canvassers above referred to one of said board to wit, S. M. Thomas, 
 left the city, and if he ever resigned as a member of said returning board it was 
 not known to either of said deponents, nor did said O. F. Himsaker, as president 
 of said board, ever at any time leceive any indication or any communication of the 
 resignation or withdrawal of said S. M. Tliomas from the said board of canvassers ; 
 and that neither of said deponents ever met or participated in any canvass of 
 returns after said S. M. Thomas left the city, nor did they ever comijlete the can- 
 vass of said returns, nor did they ever authorize any person or persons to do so for 
 them. Said deponents further state that by the pretended canvass of said returns, 
 as pul dished without the consent of said deponents, the returns from the following 
 parishes are shown to have been entirely thrown out, to wit: Saint Martin, Iberia, 
 Terrebonne, Iberville, and Saint James ; that the said parishes were and are well 
 known to be largely republican, the two parishes of Saint James and Iberville alone 
 giving more than 2,500 republican majority; that there was no sufttcient proof or 
 good reason why said parishes should have been omitted ; that hail the vote of said 
 parishes been included in tlic imblication of said purjiorted returns, as of riuht it 
 should have been, it would have added several thousand votes to the republican 
 ticket; and dejmnents further say that a fair, proper, and correct canvass of said 
 returns would liave shown that William 1*. Kellogg waselected governorof Louisi- 
 ana at the election held on the 4th of November, 1872, and said deponents verily 
 believe that said William P. Kellogg was elected governor of the State of Louisiana 
 by the actual votes cast at said election. 
 
 OSCAR F. HFXSAKEE. 
 
 SAMUEL M. TODD. 
 
 It is uot my intention to open that vexed question here now. I 
 want to show liow, when some members of that board were deficient 
 to serve democratic purposes, and when they actually had but a 
 minority of members available and present, some one forged the 
 names of two of the members, and the third member to-day says that 
 he never signed the returns. 
 
 Mr. SHERMAN. Is that the same as the De Feriet board? 
 
 Mr. WEST. That is the Forman board. When, as on this occa- 
 sion, the only democrat tliat they claim they could rely on, retired 
 from the performance of his functions on the returning board, this 
 committee report that that invalidated the whole proceeding ; but 
 on another occasion, when they wanted to pei'fect proceedings, they 
 did not stop about the absence of two or three members, but they 
 took occasion to falsify the retiu-us and to send up a record here to 
 Congress that was an absolute forgery. 
 
 Now, exception is also taken to some of the proceedings of the 
 board. This revision of their proceedings is technical. The com- 
 mittee say : 
 
 The law provided that in case of snch violence, intimidation, or corruption at or 
 near either poll, either during registration or election, as prevented a fair, free, 
 peaceable, and full vote, the commissioners of election, if the occuirenco was on 
 election day, the supervisors of registration, if on the day of registration, should 
 make a full, verified statement of the occurrence, and forward tbe same with and 
 annexed to the returns. 
 
 In only a few instances were there any protests accompanying these returns. 
 
 That is to say, the revisers of the doings of the returning board take 
 exception to the fact that according to their construction of the law 
 the board departed from its true letter and exercised functions that 
 were in no way devolved upon it by the law. Sir, had that board 
 been held to a true letter of the law, the whole parish of Orleans, 
 with its 13,000 democratic majority, would have been thrown out ; 
 and the democratic contestants before that board appealed to it to 
 become a court of arbitration ; and however it may be contrary to 
 law, certainly the side who have been decided against are estopped 
 
u 
 
 from tiikiufj; exception to it. 1 should like the Clerk to read what 
 were the iJiineiples that guided the action of that board. Had they 
 confined themselves to a strict observance of the law, there were 
 only twelve polls in the city of New Orleans, that gave 13,000 demo- 
 cratic majority— whether legitimate or not I will not here state— where 
 the law had been complied with, and the other one hundred and six 
 could have been entirely thrown out. I should like the Clerk to read 
 that. 
 
 The Chief Clerk read as follows : 
 
 "When the returniTiji officers entered on tlie discliargo of their dnties they first 
 took up the parisli of Oilcans, in wliicli tlieic were one liuiitheil anil eiL^htcen 
 poUins-lilace.s. There heinsthe retains for eandiilates for a munieipal f;ii\-eriinieiit, 
 two sheritls, and a<rreat number of minor ottices to be canvassed, it was deemed im- 
 portant that the eh-eted candidates should beiiuhictiMl into othreas soon as ]>ossible. 
 Immediately on enterinj: into the canvass of the votes in theparisli of Oilcans, it was 
 discovered "that the election had been cxceedinj^ly looselv conducted. In not 
 
 Erobably a dozen polling-places in the city had all the formalities riMjuired by law 
 eeu complied with. In but avery few cases had the list of voters been kept, or, 
 if kept, returned to the board, and many of those returned h.ad not been signed or 
 sworn to. In many cases the statement' of votes showing who had been voted for 
 was not kept, or, if kept, not returned to the board ; and in many cases the tally- 
 sheets were not kept, and, if kept, not returned to the board ; aiid in some cases 
 nothing but the unsigned and unswom-to tally-sheets were all that had been re- 
 turned to the board. I'nder such circumstances, if the board .should decide that a 
 compliance with all the forms of law wonhl be required to enable them to canvass 
 and compile the votes, it was evident there had been no leiral election in the parish 
 of Orleans. The board then decided that if any of the formalities required by law 
 had been complied with,|even only a tally sheet un.signed or sworn to, was returaed 
 to it by the supervisors of re^stration, they would, in the absence of anv proof of 
 fraud, intimidation or other illegal practice, canvass and compile the vote of .such 
 polling-place. Under this ruling of the board the canvass antl compilation of the 
 vote of the entire State proceeded. It became the duty of the board to carefully 
 examine the returns from every polling-place in the State, over six hundred and 
 fifty. This was done by the members of the board in person, and it occupied the 
 board from eleven a. m. to four p. m., and from six to ten o'clock p. m. of almost 
 every day for a month. During this period much time was taken up by counsel, who 
 were almost every day raising questions and making motions. It is'proper hereto 
 state That when the board entered on their labors, they permitted each of the 
 political parties to be represented by coun.sel before the board, to make any sug- 
 gestions or motions they might think proper, and this privilege was liberally 
 availed of by counsel. 
 
 It was the opinion of the board that the forms of proceeding in regard to a.sccr- 
 taining whether the election had been ati'ccted by any riot, tumult, acts of violence, 
 intimidation, armed disturbance, bribery, or corrupt inlluences pointed out in sec- 
 tions 3 and ilG of the election law, were merely directory, and that it was tlie<luty 
 of the board to inquire into any of those acts, when broui;lit to their attention by 
 any satisfactory evidence; the board was confirmed in this view of their duty by 
 the precedent set by the acts of the returning board in 1670 and 1^7:2. (the act of 
 1870 on the subiert is the same as the present law,) and this seems to bo tlie reason- 
 able and pro])er construction of this law ; this is part of the duty of the board in 
 their work of canvassing the vote. 
 
 Mr. WEST. This inquiry as to the doings of that hoard, after con 
 tending that the board should be held to a stricl^ construction of the 
 law, proceeds to say: "In only a few instances were there any pro- 
 tests" — meaning protests according to law — "presented." The fact is 
 that there were protests before that board from twenty-eight parishes, 
 or one less than one-half of the entire parishes of the State. Pro- 
 testing, making affidavits of riot.s, intimidation, or violence, is not a 
 healthy business in .some ]>ortions of Louisiana. An officer of the 
 Army has been held up to censure bccau.se he, in his capacity as a cit- 
 izen, interposed and made affidavits against five persons for' a viola- 
 tion of a section of the civil-rights bill; and he states in his official 
 report what actuated him to do it. " My name was ai>pen(led to affi- 
 davit, because any one el.se who signed it would have been killed, 
 and not to constitute myself prosecutor, wliich I have not done." 
 
15 
 
 The United States commissioner resident at Shreveport,wlien urged 
 to a faithful discharge of liis duty by this military officer, replied that 
 it would be certain death for anybody to initiate such proceedings j 
 and the committee says that reports were scarce and could not be had. 
 That is what the committee says, but the board say that they had 
 reports from twenty-eight parishes notwithstanding. The gravamen 
 of the charge against this returning board is that they changed a 
 return from twenty-nine majority democratic to a tie, and the prin- 
 cipal efforts to establish that fact are directed to the four parishes of 
 Bienville, Grant, De Soto, and Winn, and I may here, in passing, com- 
 ment upon some alleged facts presented here by a Senator a few days 
 ago, who prefaced his remarks by saying that he did not want to be 
 internipted and consequently corrected. 
 
 I heard a Senator here otter an admonition to his fellows not to 
 take newspaper reports as a record of what was being done, not to 
 draw a picture of society from newspaper reports ; but the same Sen- 
 ator in order to establish a fact before the Senate chose to ignore 
 official documents lying on his desk and under his eye and rely 
 upon a newspaper for his facts, and he had to search very indus- 
 triously to find that newspaper, because it was only in one news- 
 paper that that error was committed. With the official report of 
 this committee before him, with the repprt of the conservative mem- 
 bers of that so-called Legislature, he chose to ignore them and to 
 avail himself of a typographical error made in one paper in this city 
 in order to get thirteen votes for his candidate. 
 
 Mr. THUEMAN. Who does the Senator allude to ? I am not con- 
 scious of having referred to any newspajjer. 
 
 Mr. WEST. I did refer to the Senator, and I will tell him why I 
 referred to him. 
 
 Mr. THUEMAN. To what newspaper did I refer ? If I did so, I 
 have forgotton it. 
 
 Mr. WEST. I did not say that the Senator quoted a newspaper, 
 but I say he quoted a fact erroneously and accidentally misstated in 
 that paper, in support of his proposition when an official document 
 was on his desk 
 
 Mr. THUEMAN. What was it ? 
 
 Mr. WEST. I will state. He said that there were 71 votes cast 
 when Mr. Wiltz was elected. The report of this committee which I 
 am now discussing says 58. The report of the conservative body 
 says 58. These were before the Seuator on his desk ; but the morning 
 Chronicle in this city, the day that happened, made a typographical 
 error and gave blank credit for 14 votes by mistake. I do not know 
 whether that is the identity of the Senator's information or not, bub 
 such are the facts. 
 
 Mr. THUEMAN. I made no reference to the Chronicle, but I 
 should be perfectly willing to take the Senator's statement if 58 is 
 not a quorum and two over. But I had (and I will bring it into the 
 Senate to show to the Senator but I will not interrupt him too much) 
 precisely the statement which I read. 
 
 Mr. WEST. If I have not stated the Senator's position correctly 
 he will pardon me, for the reason that I have not his remarks before 
 me. I caught them by ear, and I know that he asserted, if he has 
 not expunged it from "his speech, that there were 71 votes cast that 
 day. 
 
 This report alleges that a majority of 29 had been changed, and 
 they took exception to the action in the cases of Bienville, Grant, 
 De Soto, and Wiun Parishes. I should like to have read from the 
 
10 
 
 official report of the, retunuujf boar;! wliat was tlie action in tlinso 
 parishes, and to show that the boai-d aetetl in strict conformity with 
 the provisions of tlic hrw wlien it absolutely and j>ositively ex- 
 cluded the count of those ])arishes from tlieir returns. There was 
 nothing transmitted to the Le<;ishitMre. It was a mere ministerial 
 act, in accordance with law lliat, l)eing satisfied themselves that 
 such violence and outrag"0 cxisteil in those parishes as vitiated the 
 election, they had the right, and it was their sworn duty, to exclude 
 those parishes from their count. I ask the Clerk to read what is said 
 about these parishes in the report of tlie returning board. 
 The Chief Clerk read as follows: 
 
 BIENVILLE. 
 This parish was oiitiri'l y rcj(H'tpil. The pviileiioo Hhowod th:tt tliis pariwli ail joins 
 the parish of lied Itiverj in wliiih tlic Consliatta inunkrs look i)larc, and tliat 
 many of the ])ersons who participatcil inth<ls(^ murders wtre from tins ]iaii.sh; that 
 soon after these murders, and before the 1-lth of Septenilier, 1874. the tax-collector 
 of this parish was forced to resii^n by a committee of white-leajrners ; that colored 
 school-teachers were whii)ped and driven out of tliis parish ; that tlie leading re- 
 publican in tliis parish was advised, and acted on the ad^•ice, not to attempt to or- 
 ganize the i)arty or to vote. There w-is not a republican vote cast in this parish. 
 That the rejiistiation shows that 780 white and 442 colored voters wer(> registered, 
 and the pretended returns from this parish showed 779 votes and nearly tlie same 
 number of white registered voters. Tlie board was satisfied there was no fair, 
 peaceable, or free election in this pari.sh. 
 
 GRANT. 
 
 The vote of this parish was thrown out ; the evidence satisfied us that the elec- 
 tion was entirely irregular in this parish, and that intimidation prevailed at every 
 poll in this )).irish. The direful effects of the Colfax massacre is so severely and 
 generally fidt in this pari.sh. that it cannot besaid there was a free, fair, and peace- 
 able election at any poll in this parish. This paiish is strongly republican. 
 
 DE SOTO. 
 
 Under the fourth head of obiectionsto pari.shes or polling- places being canvassed 
 and compiled, it was found tliat the supervisor of registration for the parish of 
 De Soto liad made no return of the electioniu thisparisli totlieboard. It is proper 
 to remark tliat the first supervisor of registration appointed for this parish was 
 one of the men murdered at the ("ousliatta massacre. There is no officer author- 
 ized to make the ii'turns of election to tlie board except the supervisor of registra- 
 tion; it is to him tliat the list of voteis and tallvsheets are to be delivered and by 
 him transmitted to the board, as well as the statement of votes and condensed 
 statement of tlie votes of the pari.sh. Coming tliiongh him. the legal officer, it car- 
 ries with it that all the other forms of law have l)een complied with, and leaves the 
 board only to canvass and conijiile the votes. In this case the clerk of the court 
 of that parish ottered to ju-oduce to the board the duplicate .statement of votes said 
 to be furnished liini by tlie commissioners of election, also tally-sheets ; but in order 
 to verify tliose documents as genuine, and such as ought to have been produced by 
 the supervisor, it would be necessai-y for the board to go into evidence on the sub- 
 It was stated to the board, during the canvass and comiiilation of the votes, that 
 the democratic counsels in att.-ndance on the board had luid tlie siqiervi.sorof regis- 
 tration of tlie iiarisli of De Soto anested and brought before I'nited States Commi.s- 
 sioner Craig, on the charge of concealing; the returns of thatp.iri.sh from the board. 
 It was also stated that the supervisor had the returns with him when brmight bo- 
 fore the commissioner, hut that he was discharged by the commissioner on .some 
 compromise made with him bv the democratic couimel. There was no evii.Unrebef ore 
 the board that a jirostilutc had the returns and wafi offering them for sale, f^uch thing 
 was casualbi stntud to the tioard. but not as evidence, and was not reduced to writing 
 and was not consnUred liv the board as anytliing more thanapassingremark. ^ot 
 being a court of general jurisdiction, it was the oidniou of the Ixiard that it could 
 not verify an act on such' documents, and declined to receive and act on them. The 
 counsel for the democratic committee applied to the jiroper court for a mandamus 
 to compel the board to receive such evidence of the election and canvass and com- 
 pile the votes therefrom; but after jileadings and full arguments of counsel the 
 court refused the 7nandamus. This decision of tlie court sustaining the ]iosit(ou 
 taken by the board, the board, in other cases where the snjiervisor of resist r;ition 
 had failed to make returns of any poll, held that the default could not be sui>plied, 
 and that if any party should be In.jured by it they would have their legal recourse, 
 as the law is iinderstood to afford' ample 'relief iii such cases. 
 
17 
 
 Uuder the fifth head of the protests aud objectious, as above stated, comes the 
 parish of "VTiun. The evidence showed that James P. Keidheimer, resident ot 
 that parish, had been appointed supervisor of registration for the parish by Gov- 
 ernor Kellogg ou the 7th day of August, 1674, but that by letter to Governor Kel- 
 logg he had resigned, or rather refused to accept the appointment, and had failed 
 to qualify. Aft-erward Governor Kellogg appointed C. S. Kaiidall to this office, 
 who qualified and went forward to discliargo the duties of the office. Upon apply- 
 ing for the papers and blanks which had been forwarded to Eeidheiraer when lie 
 was appointed, he refused to deliver them to Randall, who was then threatened 
 with death if he did not leave the parish, whereupon he left the x'-iiish subse- 
 quently without any notice to Governor Kellogg. Keidheimer proceeded to make 
 a registration under which the election was held, and he (Keidheimer) made return 
 to the board of said election. 
 
 The board also had before them the certificate of the secretary of state, showing 
 that C. S. Kaudall was the legally-appointed supervisor of the parish. 
 
 It was from this evidence the opinion of the board that there had been no legal 
 registration of the voters of this parish, withoiit which there could bo no legal 
 election, and that the unlawful act of Keidheimer in not turning fiver to Kandall 
 the books and blanks to enable him to make a legal registration, and the violent 
 acts of the citizens in ordering Kandall away from the parish on pain of death, 
 made it the duty of the board to reject the pretended returns and vote of this 
 parish. * *' * * * 
 
 Mr. WEST. I was calling atteution to the fact that there were 
 four parishes in dispute, or rather, the whole atiair of the 4th of Jan- 
 uary last depended greatly upon what action might be had in refer- 
 ence to the elections in those parishes. In one of them, Kienville, the 
 board threw out the returns because a republican was not allowed 
 to vote in the whole parish. In Grant, a republican parish, and largely 
 republican, the scenes of disorder were so great that this board could 
 not find it their duty to admit that parish. 
 
 Mr. MORTON. Is that the parish in which Colfax was? 
 
 Mr. WEST. That is the parish in which Colfax is situated. In 
 the parish of Winn, the legally appointed supervisor of registration 
 was threatened with his life if he undertook to exercise the functions 
 of his office, but the white-leaguers improvised a registrar, and ho 
 conducted the registration ; and they asked the retirrning board to 
 consider such returns as those ! 
 
 In De Soto the registrar being satisfied that the whole proceedings 
 were violent, and not being able to get any affidavits to substantiate 
 his position, came down and met the returning board and the white- 
 leaguers, and they endeavored to compel him to produce those re- 
 turns and he did not do it and the board had nothing before them. 
 We remember with what uuction our friends contended that those 
 returns were in the hands of a woman of bad character and were 
 offered for sale for a thousand dollars. The returning board say that 
 there was no evidence of that kind. It was casually stated to the 
 board, but was not oftered as evidence and was not reduced to writ- 
 ing and was not considered by the board as anything more than a 
 passing remark. If such was the case, the contending parties on the 
 other side had ample opportunities to establish it, and they should 
 not state it now unless they made the allegation good at tliat time. 
 
 Now, what does this committee show was done with these returns ? 
 They start out with the broad proposition that twenty-nine men 
 were changed and they only show you by their report that four were 
 changed. In the parish of Eapides three were changed according to 
 the judgment of the returning board, and in the parish of Terre 
 Bonne one was changed. So with all the scrutiny and investigation 
 of this committee, starting out with the broad assertion that twenty- 
 nine were changed, they only show you that four were changed. We 
 come now to what this committee siiv upon the general subject of 
 
 2p 
 
18 
 
 the general couditioii of affairs in the State, and thej- start out with 
 this proposition : 
 
 Both parties agreed upon four parishes as samples of the condition of affiiirs, iu 
 that respect, in the State. Of these, owing to the irii])ossiiiility of procurin!; wit- 
 nesses ft'om the locality iu time, your committee were obliged to t^onfine their 
 especial examination to two parishes most accessible. 
 
 Then this investigation that went 1)roadcastover tlie State of Lou- 
 isiana, that ]iresuiues to give you an epitome of its condition, moral, 
 political, and social, eontined itself ultimately to two parishes, and 
 the testimony docs not show that they examined more than one. 
 How were those who assumed the negative of the proposition whicli 
 seems to have impregnated the whole action of this committee to 
 know what parishes were examined? How were they to get their 
 witnesses there to testify as to the facts ? Is [it any wonder, witli 
 such a proceeding as that, that they came to the conclusion that they 
 wel'e constrained to say that the intention charged is not borne out 
 by the facts, that no general intimidation of republican voters is 
 established? I can take you to a parish in that State where there 
 is no intimidation, and it is jiossible tliat this committee selected 
 those very parishes to examine. Intimidation in the State of Louisi- 
 ana and throughout the South did not commence with the electiou 
 of 1874. The echoes of the last gun tired at Appomattox had scarcely 
 died upon the ear before this intimidation was practiced broadcast 
 throughout the South, and it has continued to be up to the present 
 day. I speak for my State. I show to the Senate the record that 
 throughout its existence since the day of reconstruction there has 
 been nothing but intimidation, proscription, murder, and violence 
 practiced by the democrats of that State. 
 
 From 1806 to the present time there have been nine great butch- 
 eries or massacres for jjolitical reasons in the State of Louisiana. In 
 1866, in New Orleans, two hundred persons were killed, and one hun- 
 dred and sixty were taken to the marine hospital, and the surgeon on 
 duty at that time and the surgeon now on duty— the same man — ha.s 
 asserted to the fact that after those wounded men were taken to that 
 hospital the rioters formed a line in its rear and tired a volley into 
 its chambers. Here is one of the volumes of the history of affairs in 
 Louisiana. The history of violence in Louisiana is not to be learned 
 iu eight days. It lies here under my hand in eight volumes of testi- 
 mony, every ])ago telling of a life and every word upon every page 
 counting for a dro]) of blood shed in the sacritice of political opinions. 
 What did thecommittee then say ? I will read briefly their opinion 
 of that horror : 
 
 There has been no occasion during onr national history when a riot has occur- 
 red 80 destitute of iustitiable cause, resulting in a massa<;re so inhuman and tiend- 
 like as that which took place at New Orleans on the 30th of July last. 
 
 The massacre was brgini and finished in midday; and such proofs of prepara- 
 tion were .iiscluscd tliat we are constrained to say that an intention, existing some- 
 where, to disin-rsc and to shiughter the members of tlie <-onveiition. and tliose per- 
 .sons, white and blacli, who were present and wore friendly to its purposes, was 
 mercilessly carried into etleet. 
 
 No intimidation in Louisiana ! ! And yet in the same yearthe Bo8.sier 
 Parisli massacre took place, in which over three hundred were killed 
 and wounded; the Saint Landry massacre, in which two hundred 
 were kilk'd and wounded ; the Orleans massacres, in which sixty-three 
 were killed and wounded ; the Caddo massacre, in which forty-six 
 were killed and wounded; the .Jefferson massacre, in which forty- 
 seven wore killed and woinidcd; the Saint Bernard massacre, in 
 which sixty-eight were killed and wounded. All these occurred in 
 the one year, 1868. 
 
19 
 
 Here is the experience of some of the officers of the Army of those 
 practices. Here is an officer reporting about the massacre in Saint 
 Bernard Parish. He says: 
 
 Practically there is no civil law in Saint Bernard Parish. A company of United 
 States troops are now doing duty there, and their continued presence is necessary 
 to protect from outrasje men loyal to the Government, to prevent the murder of 
 freed people, and to preserve general peace and tranquillity throughout the parish ; 
 and it is my opinion that the men now living in that parish' who have recently com- 
 mitted murder with impunity will not be arraigned nor brought to justice except 
 through the direct agency of military power. 
 
 I am, major, verj' respectfullv, your obedient servant, 
 
 J. M. LEE, 
 First Lieutenant Thirty-ninth United States Infantry, A. A. I. G, 
 Brevet Major B. T. Hutchixs, 4. A. A. G., 
 
 Bureau jR., F., and A. L., Xevj Orleans, Louisiana. 
 
 After speaking of sixty-one murders perpetrated between October 
 23 and November 21, 1868, he says : 
 
 In conclusion I desire to represent that upon entering on duty in this bureau as act- 
 ing assistant inspector general, on the 18th of September last, I thought it impossible 
 that crimes so bloody and rioting could or would be perpetrated with so much impu- 
 nity and wantonness by any people in a civilized country as those which have been 
 brought to my attention, and whicli I have in many cases investigated. At first I 
 thought the general repoi ts and published accounts of the carnival of crime in this 
 State were vastly exaggerated, but the plain, clear, and indisputable facts which 
 have been developed, and the cumulative evidence which has been and can be 
 brour;ht forward at any time, carries the conviction to any honest and candid man 
 that lawlessness, anarchv, and crime predominate in the State of Louisiana, subject- 
 ing the loyal and peaceable citizens of this State to a reign of terror which they 
 cannot avert, and from which they cannot escape through any efforts of their own. 
 I am, major, very respectfully, your obedient servant, 
 
 J. M. LEE, 
 First Lieutenant Thirty-ninth Infantry, A. A. I. General. 
 Brevet Major B. T. Hutchiss, 
 A. A. A. G. Bureau R., F., and A L., Keio Orleans, Louisiana. 
 
 Now, sir, what was the effect upon the election of 1868 of such vio- 
 lence, and what were the violences that preceded the last election and 
 what was the effect of them? 
 
 The day of election in 1868 was as peaceable and quiet an election day as eve 
 occurred in this country. Yet in the parish of Orleans, where there were from 
 13,000 to 16,001) registered republican voters, the total vote cast for General Grant 
 was only 270 ; in the parish of Bienville, out of 715 registered republican voters, 1 
 vote was cast for Grant ; in the parish of Bossier, out of 1,895 registered republican 
 voters, 1 vote was cast for Grant; in Caddo, out of 3,134 registered republican 
 voters, 1 vote was cast for Grant ; in Calcasieu, out of 245 republican voters, 9 
 votes were cast for Grant ; in Claiborne, out of 1,293 republican votes, 2 votes were 
 cast for Grant ; in Morehouse, out of 1,330 registered republican voters, 1 vote was 
 ' cast for Grant ; in Sabine, out of 227 registered republican voters, 2 votes were cast 
 for Grant; in Saint Bernard, out of 610 registered republican voters, 1 vote was cast 
 for Grant ; in Saint Landry, out of 3,641 registered republican voters, not one vote 
 was cast for Grant ; in Union, out of 872 registered republican voters, 1 vote was 
 cast for Grant; in Saint Martin, out of 933 registered republican voters, 25 votes 
 were cast for Grant; in Saint Helena, out of 569 registered republican voters, 130 
 votes were cast for Grant; in Avoyelles, out of 2,188 registered republican voters, 
 520 votes were cast for Grant ; in Catahoula, out of 992 registered republican voters, 
 150 votes were cast for Grant; in Caldwell, out of 586 registered republican voters, 
 28 votes were cast for Grant ; while in those banner democratic auct White League 
 parishes of De Soto, with 1,403 republican voters; Franklin, with 507 republican 
 voters ; Jackson, with 822 republican voters ; Lafayette, with 897 republican voters ; 
 "Vermilion, with 282 republican voters ; and Washington, with 168 republican voters, 
 not one solitary republican vote for Grant was castin all those parishes. The net 
 result of the democratic and White Camellia campaign of 1868 was that outof 36,278 
 republican votes in twenty-two parishes of the State, through intimidation, fear, 
 and terrorism resulting from the massacres before enumerated, only 1,118 republi- 
 can, votes were allowed to be deposited for General Grant. 
 
 Sir, is it to be supposed that the massacre of Colfax had no effect 
 in intimidatiug republicans in that part of the State, where one hun- 
 dred men were slaughtered, and slaughtered simply because they 
 
20 
 
 ■Toro maiutiiiiilng their right to tbcir own political opinions? Had 
 L'onshatta, where «ix men were treacherously nmrdered, robbed, 
 mutilated, and nameless outrages jierpetrated upon their remains, 
 until, as the testimony shows, they were so hacked to pieces that it 
 was difticnlt to bury them, no inlluence in intimidating voters in 
 Louisiana ? Had the atlair of the 14tii of September, where some 
 fifty or sixty lives were sacrificed, no influence in intimidating voters 
 in Louisiana? And yet your committee say that no general intimi- 
 dation of republican voters was practiced in the State ! Colfax, Cou- 
 shatta, and the 14th of September did for the election of 1874 what 
 Orleans, Bossier, and those up-river parishes did for the election of 
 1868, and that conclusion is irresistible. 
 The Shreveport Times of July 29 says: 
 
 There has heen some red-handed work done in this parish that was necessary, 
 bnt it was evidently done by cool, detennined, and just men, who knew just how 
 far to go ; and we doubt not if the same kitid of work is necessary it will be done. 
 
 We say again that v;e fulli/, cordiallij approve what the white men of Grant and 
 Rapides "did at Colfax ; the white man who does not is a creature so base that he 
 shames the worst class of his species. "We say again we are going to cairy the 
 elections in this State next fall. 
 
 The man who dares even to dissent from the outrages perpetrated 
 by miscreants in the murders at Colfax and the murders at Coushatta 
 "is a creature so base that he shames the worst class of his species." 
 Can you expect men to go before a committee and testify to the fact 
 that violence and disorder exist in that State? 
 
 I should like to say a few words now, Mr. President, upon what 
 this committee say about the general condition of atiairs in the State 
 of Louisiana. After first starting out with the proposition that they 
 would not examine anything but the condition of affairs in two par- 
 ishes, and when they only did examine one, they come to this conclu- 
 sion : 
 
 The general condition of affairs in the State of Louisiana seems to he as follows : 
 The conviction has been general among the whites, since 1872, that the Kellogg 
 government was a usurpation. 
 
 I am aware that that is the conviction. How that conviction was 
 created is well known. It commenced by a little coterie, a ring of 
 political adventurers, in New Orleans, who undertook to manipulate 
 the election machinery of that State, and Avho personally admit to- 
 day that their operations were unsuccessful, and that they had palmed 
 a f raTul on the whole of the people. Suppose that conviction is among 
 the white people of the State, only among the white democrats, even 
 if it is universal among them, the colored people do not think so ; and 
 because that minority believe that the government is a usurpation, 
 is that any reason or cause for characterizing it as such? 
 
 This conviction among them has been strengthened by the acts of the Kellogg 
 Legislature abolishing existing courts and judges, and substituting others presided 
 over by judges appoint<'d by Kellogg, having extraordinary and exclusive jurisdic- 
 tion over political ([ui stioiis ; * * " by the abolition of courts with elective 
 ndges, and tlic substitution of other courts with judges appointed by Kellogg in 
 evasion of the constitution of the State. 
 
 Mr. President, the question of Governor Kellogg's authority to do 
 this has never been raised except by the political clique that I men- 
 tioned. The people generally haveVecognized those courts ; the bar 
 of New Orleans, which is almost universally democratic, bas never 
 taken exception to the act of the governor in that respect. The poli- 
 ticians have done it, but the law-abiding citizens have not. 
 
 " By enactments imnishiug criminally all x'ersons who attempted to 
 fillofticial positions unless returned by the returning board," all that 
 is needed in certain parishes is to get eight or ten men with bowie- 
 
21 
 
 knives and they will remove any man tliey please, and without any 
 title whatever take possession of his office. Are not laws necessary 
 to protect a community against such an outrage as that ? 
 
 By changes in the laws, centralizing in the governor every foi-m of political con 
 trol, inclading the supervision of the elections ; by continuing the returning hoard, 
 ■with absolute power over the returns of elections. 
 
 Mind you, Mr. President, this is an arraignment of what has been 
 done uuiler what is known as the Kellogg administration, and there 
 is the assertion of the fact that the Kellogg administration is respon- 
 sible for centralizing in the liands of the governor all political con- 
 trol in the supervision of elections, when the record is well known, 
 and it has been shown here, that all the legislation that has been 
 had by the Legislature under Governor Kellogg has been in the di- 
 rection of liberalizing the election laws; and they are more liberal 
 to-day than when he came into power. I have told you this was a 
 democratic White League brief, and I think I will convince you of 
 it before I get through — 
 
 By the extraordinary provisions enacted for the trial of titles and claims to 
 otiice. 
 
 All these provisions Avere enacted by a preceding administration, 
 and they were made necessary by the circumstances to which I have 
 adverted. They were not enacted by the Kellogg government ; and I 
 may remark just here that I challenge any member on the opposition 
 side of this Chamber to show any act of the Kellogg legislature to 
 which he or the people of Louisiana can take reasonable exception — 
 
 By the conversion of the police force, maintained at the expense of the city of 
 TJew Orleans, into an armed brigade of State militia, subject to the command of 
 the governor. 
 
 The police act of New Orleans was enacted in 18G9, at a time when 
 the militia laws of the United States, as applicable to that State, were 
 in suspense. Congress, in July, 1867, suspended those laws with refer- 
 ence to Louisiana and renewed them in 18(39; so that, whatever reason 
 there might have been for the passage of such a law at that time to 
 maintain the government, the denunciation of it does not apply nor 
 pertain to the present government. 
 
 But it was not considered judicious to arm the militia there in that 
 State at that time. It was neither lawful nor judicious. Subse- 
 quently it became lawful; but it never became judicious, because the 
 white-ieaguers, who were sworn in by the goveruer of the State to 
 protect its laws, to maintain its constitution inviolate, ignominiously 
 laid down their arms at the first demand on them to do their duty. 
 That is the kind of militia we had in New Orleans and in Louisiana. 
 
 By the creation in some places of monopolies in markets — 
 
 True, the Legislature of Louisiana, under the Kellogg administra- 
 tion, has passed an act with reference to markets. That act was pro- 
 posed to them and solicited from them by the democratic administra- 
 tion in the city-hall of New Orleans. What was that legislation ? 
 Simply as the markets belonged to the city of New Orleans and as 
 democrats were their lessees, it was due to those democrats to protect 
 them in the value of their property by prevening the interposition of 
 private markets within a reasonable distance. That is the monopoly 
 of markets that is charged here upon the republicans ; which was 
 done to keep the democratic coffers of the city of New Orleans re- 
 plete with revenue, and which is now taken exception to. 
 
 Gas making — 
 
 We have had a monopoly of gas oppressing us like the monopoly 
 
in this city. Iq the city of New Orleaus we have had it for tweuty- 
 live years. It is an old democratic institution, belonging to some of 
 our oldest and best. How, in the name of Heaven, is the Kellogg 
 government responsible for wliat occurred thirty years before we ever 
 thought of having such a government there ? 
 
 Water-works — 
 
 Ditto for that ; water- works belonging to the city of New Orleans, 
 and the city administered by democratic officials, and yet the repub- 
 licans are charged with having a monopoly of them ! 
 
 Cleaning vaults and removing filtli — 
 
 That is abiisiness which we are perfectly willing to surrender to the 
 other side. 
 
 Doing work ha wharfingers — 
 
 I was surprised at that. There are twelve wliarfingers holding 
 position in New Orleans. They are every one of them democratic ap- 
 pointments, and they have a monopoly of the business. They have 
 a monopoly of drawing their salary, four of them at $1,800 a year, 
 and eight of them at $1,200. 
 
 Mr. SCOTT. And controlled by the State. 
 
 Mr. WEST. Yes, controlled by the city under the State ; and they 
 are democratic appointments, every one of tbem. That is one of the 
 charges brought against the republicans. 
 
 By unlimited appropriations for the payment of militia exitonses and for the pay- 
 ment of legislative warrants, vouchers, and checks issued during the years 1870 
 and 1872— 
 
 There was such a provision ingrafted upon an appropriation bill, 
 as it passed the Legislature, and the governor could not veto that bill 
 without stopping the whole wheels of government. He signed the 
 bill, but he promptly, through his attorney -general, instituted pro- 
 ceedings and enjoined such action ; and to-day I am informed that 
 not one dollar has been drawn out of the treasury under such surrep- 
 titious i)roceedings. 
 
 By laws declaring that uo persons in arrears for taxes after default published 
 shall bring any suit in any court of the State or be allowed to be a witness in his 
 own behalf — " 
 
 That is one of the methods that has been resorted to to strangle 
 the existence of republican government in that State. In the tes- 
 timony taken in what is known as the investigation of Louisiana 
 aflairs, the secretary of one of the tax-resisting associations was put 
 upon the stand in a room in this building and he testitied to the 
 existence of a league, not embracing all the people of Louisiana who 
 were tax-payers, but thinking that nine-tenths of them would refuse 
 to pay their taxes. There is the sworn testimonyof the secretary of 
 that league that they intended to resist by all constitutional means 
 the payment of taxi's. I do not blame them for that. I blame no 
 man for resorting to constitutional means to assert his rights ; but I 
 maintain that we have the right also to resort to constitutional 
 means to make him perform his duty. 
 Then again, with reference to the tinancial condition of the State — 
 The securities of the State have fallen in two years from 70 or 80 to 25, 
 
 I scarcely wish to weary the Senate with all the circumstances under 
 which the securities of tlie State of Tjouisiana have been scaled ; but 
 it is well known here, or if it is not remembered now I will remind 
 the Senate that by an act of the Legislature at the last session, an 
 cat framed and originated in and solicited by the New Orleans Cham- 
 
23 
 
 bor of Commerco, (.and -when you say that you say by tlie leadiu"- 
 democrats of the city,) the debt of the State of Louisiana has been 
 scaled and there has been a consequent depreciation of its vahie. That 
 is to say, a debt of 100, according to the constitutional amendment 
 recently passed, is now only worth 60. Consequently there has been 
 a decline from 100 to 60, a decline made in the interests of the people 
 of Louisiana generally, whether property-holders or mere indii-ect 
 tax-payers— a reduction that they asked for. Therefore the reduc- 
 tion of the debt or the depreciation of the value of that debt to at 
 least that amount cannot be charged to the wrong-doiu«- of the re- 
 publicans. But they ?ay it has gone down to 2.5. Ah, yes! audit 
 will go down to zero if you keep up your strife. Keep up your 
 revolts, your revolutions, your threateniugs, your proscriptions and 
 your violence and your bonds will go to protest, and Louisiana will 
 have no place to lay her head in Wall street. 
 
 Then the securities of the city of New Orleans have fallen from 
 80 or 90 in two years to 30 or 40, as the committee state. There is 
 another evidence of your violence and intimidation and the shrink- 
 ing always arising from fields of strife and insecurity. But why was 
 it so ? Did the republicans have control of the city of New Orleans 
 in the last two or three years '? When the republican administration 
 went out of power in the city of New Orleans her bonds and securi- 
 ties were worth 90 cents to adollar ; to-day they are worth but 30- and 
 yet that is charged as one of the faults of the Kellogg government 
 That is one of the faults of the republican Legislature of Louisiana" 
 who, coming to the relief of these very securities, has offered a con- 
 stitutional amendment, which has been adopted by the people that 
 the debt of the city of New Orleans shall not be increased. Where is 
 the responsibilty there ? It is with the democratic city administration 
 and with that inherent spirit of bedevilment that infests that com- 
 munity that does not inspire confidence in its ability to keep its 
 engagements. The governor in his last annual message calls atten- 
 tion to this fact. He says : 
 
 ti.JloL*' J/«y f^^ H •'"?* ?"'^'''^. the receipts have been nearly equal to the expenses • 
 the rate of State and city taxation has been largely re.iuce 1, and for the first time 
 for many years not one dollar has been added" to-" the public debt, which on the 
 contrary, has been considerably reduced. "mcu, on me 
 
 "Taxation has been increased. Property cannot be sold for the 
 taxes That is so. Some property in New Orleans cannot be sold 
 tor the taxes, because there is year upon year, and sometimes five 
 years of tax resistance to pay on it, and who wants property in that 
 Sta,te when taxes encumber it? That is the fact. When you come 
 to find out that property can be bought for taxes, it is because there 
 are five years of tax resistance encumbering it. When the Kello"-"- 
 administration waB inaugurated, the taxes in the State were 2U 
 milJs--two cents, and fifteen-hundredths. Now, by the act of this 
 repubhcan Legislature, ratified by the people of the State, the tax 
 18 14| mills. When the Kellogg administration went into power the 
 city taxes were 30 mills. By the act of the Kellogg legislature, rati- 
 fied by the people of New Orleans, the taxes have been reduced to 
 <:t> mills, and yet that government is charged with encumbering the 
 ^'^v? tT • '''^^^tioii and increasing its burdens untold ! 
 
 Mr. President, I must confess my indignation at the character of 
 this report, that men who had the opportunity to have learned the 
 true st.ate of aftairs, men who could not have failed to have known 
 by all the history of the day of the acts of violence that have been 
 perpetrated m that community for the last nine years, should tell you 
 
24 
 
 tliai life U secure there, and confine their iu(];uries to the stealing of 
 a few ehiekens. In order to establivsh that fact, tliey oven resort to 
 the potent and reverend authority of a prelate of the church, a hu- 
 mane, considerate, and compassionate bishop, who, deaf to the out- 
 cry of his fellow-men, oppressed and done to death, lends a sympa- 
 thetic ear to the cackle of a captured chicken or to the squeal of a 
 purloined \ng, and laments the destruction of the fat of the land and 
 the wasting thereof. Lofty, dignified, and earnest investigation is 
 that which turns away with indiflereuce from the wail of tliousands 
 of human beings, and in solemn pomp weeps over the fate of a dead 
 rooster. That is the way the outrages and the sacrilices and the 
 jnurders are treated in my State. Chicken-thieves and pig-stealers ! 
 That is all the evidence they could find on the subject. 
 
 I have no desire, Mr. President, to detain the Senate longer with 
 this category of evils and outrages. I always preface what I have to 
 submit in regard to Louisiana by saying that it is an unpleasant neces- 
 sity forced upon me ; and with a few more remarks I will conclude. 
 The committee directed their attention to the organization of a White 
 League, and they say of it in New Orleans : 
 
 That league is an orMnization composed of difiVrent tlu'os, mimbeiiug in all 
 between twenty-live ami twenty-eight hundred. 
 
 To be sure, there is another party of white-leaguers throughout the 
 'State, but it must not under any circumstances "be confounded with 
 the White League of the city of New Orleans." 
 
 Their objects and aims and purposes and organization are all the 
 same. I do not think that either party would suiter much in repu- 
 tation by being confounded with the other ; but look at the pretext 
 under which this committee wants you to believe that White League 
 was organized : 
 
 Their purposes they declare to be simply protective. 
 
 There are one hundred and fifty thousand white people in the city 
 of New Orleans and fifty thousand blacks. The white people are 
 organizing; the committee certifying — 
 
 Kor, on the other hand, did it appear that there was any extensive secret league 
 -among the blacks of any kind. 
 
 Three white men organizing and providing themselves with arms 
 to defend themselves against one black man I It is preposteroius, Mr. 
 President. 
 
 Now, we hear the question asked constantly on tliis floor why is 
 -not the civil law ettoctive in the Southern States ? If these nuirders 
 are perpetrated, why do you not punish them ? We have answered 
 <ni one or two occasions and sufficiently, that the officers of the law 
 in the prosecution of their duty have been foully murdered. But I 
 will go to a more general review of the condition of tlu^ law and its 
 administration in the Southern States. I would like to read to you 
 here what is said T)y a practitioner at the bar about the administra- 
 tion of justice in the Southern States generally. He says: 
 
 The laws of the States designed for the protection of life and property are not 
 enforced with certainty, and in cases where they are violated by, members of the 
 democratic party for p<ditic.al purposes they aie violated with impunity. Cou- 
 gre.ssional investigations have made known t« the world that secret oath-bound 
 organizations >\ist tluotighout the Southern States; that their object is by force 
 and vioh-nce to prevent the newly-enfranchised race from exercising the right of 
 sutfrage, and thus to deprive them of i)i>litical power ; that in the executiim ot their 
 design thi' nuMubers of these stieret organizations have committed crimes without 
 liumber of a nature calculated to intimidate and terrify, and that they are a^s free 
 
25 
 
 fi-om fear of pimisliment, or cause to fear, by the enforcement of tlie laws of the 
 States iu which the offenses were committed, as though they were wholly guiltless. 
 So prevalent and powerful is the sympathy for those who commit these acts, that 
 before it the law is insignificant and powerless. In the rarest instances has a 
 grand jury preferred a bill of indictment against any of the perpetrators of these 
 crimes, and in no instance that lias come to our knowledge has a petit jury been 
 found to return a verdict of guilty against the perpetrators of even the most unpro- 
 voked and cruel miu'der when committed upon the person of a republican for po- 
 litical reasons. In this country the law is sustained by public opinion, and public 
 opinion is stronger than the law. Our fathers in the Jfoundatiou of oiir system of 
 government never realized that the day would come when the lives of American cit- 
 izens could be taken unla^vf iilly and iu great numbers, and no witness to such deeds 
 could be found to prefer a complaint, no sheriff to execute a warrant, and no senti- 
 ment in the community sufficiently strong to secure the condemnation of the offense 
 or the punishment of the offenders. Yet this is the case in the Southern States to-day. 
 A powerful press preserves silence as to the offense, or persistently misrepresents 
 the cii'cumstances under which it was committed, or, where concealment is no 
 longer possible, boldly defends the act of the criminal. The character of the dead 
 vicnm is maligned, and a deed of blood, horrible in its details, is exalted into an 
 act of patriotism. "Where, under the laws of the General Government, the United 
 States courts have jurisdiction of the offense and succeed in arraigning the crimi- 
 nal, the more talented and influential members of the legal profession hasten to 
 volunteer their services in Iris defense ; and where bail i.s required for the appear- 
 ance of the offender, the wealthy members of the community eagerly place their 
 names upon the bond. Upon the trial it is simply impossible" to secure, fairly and 
 in the manner prescribed by law, twelve men who will decide impartially between 
 the Government and the accused, and render a verdict in accordance with the law 
 and the evidence. Those men who have sworn to murder when commanded by 
 their secret organizations, and who were perhaps accessory to the commission of 
 the offense, readily appear upon the witness-stand to prove that the prisoner was 
 engaged in innocent occupation far firom the place where the crime was committed. 
 All the influence and powei- of the democratic party are exerted in the defense of 
 the accused, and he may well view with inditterence the efforts of those whose duty 
 it is to secure the infliction of the peualtj' for the violation of the law. The crimi- 
 nal offenses over wliich the Uniteil States courts have jurisdiction are limited in 
 their number ; and the only restraint upon the commission of .crimes of the nature 
 indicated exercised by the Federal courts springs iu most cases fiom the annoy- 
 ance and expense of undergoing a form of trial, and not fi-om the fear of conviction 
 or its results. If in a rare instance a conviction should be had, the criminal, how- 
 ever heinous might be his offense, however much in violation of the laws of his 
 country and of God, would find sympathy and comfort and support from the mem- 
 bers of that party in whose cause he was required to suffer. With no sense of dis- 
 grace, no feeling of remorse, hut with a mind imbued with the teachings of his 
 democratic leaders, he would endure the penalty for his offense with the prideof a 
 patriot and the fortitude of a martyr. 
 
 Such is the manner in which crimes of the greatest atrocity are 
 treated at the South. Those who commit them have the warmest sym- 
 pathy of the democratic party there, and the democrats of that region 
 find sympathy, countenance, and support among the democrats here. 
 If that is not apologizing for murder it is sympathizing with those 
 who sympathize with those who commit it, and under that refinement 
 of distinction apologists for those murders must take refuge. 
 
 I would like to say a few words with reference to the proscription, 
 the ostraci.sm that is practiced upon the republicans throughout the 
 South in reference to their j)olitical opinions. In 1868 the demo- 
 cratic party of Louisiana issued an official circular from which I will 
 quote an expression. Here it is, signed by the president of the State 
 central committee and by four of his fellow-members, I presume the 
 executive committee. Speaking about the resentment that should 
 be entertained against white republicans, it says : 
 
 But iu no case should you permit this resentment to go further than to with- 
 draw fi'om them all countenance, association, and patronage, and thwart every 
 effort they may make to maintain a business and social foothold among us. 
 
 Eepublicans are to be thwarted in every way, not to be allowed to 
 follow the ordinary pursuits of life. They'are to be treated as 
 
 3p 
 
26 
 
 pariahs and outcasts and not to be admitted within the sacred social 
 cii'cle. That was the gospel of peace that was promulgated in 1868, 
 and it has been followed out bitterly and mercilessly up to the pres- 
 ent hour. In the documents that were sent to ns in the message of 
 the President of the United States the same proscription was iterated 
 and reiterated over and over again, according to the excerpts that he 
 sent us from the jiress throughout the State. In the city of New 
 Orleans a merchant of high and honorable character and unblemished 
 repute who had the independence and the candor to come before this 
 committee and to state in words, scarcely using the strong terms I 
 have to-day, that lie believed the action of the repu))licans of Louisi- 
 ana since they last came into power has contributijd to tlie interest 
 of the people, became an outcast on the following day among his 
 friends and acquaintances of fifty years. He was a leading banker 
 presiding over an institution of a million dollars northern capital. 
 He had been for several years jiresident of the chamber of commerce ; 
 and because he had the independence and candor to go before that 
 committee and to state that he believed that the evils of the hour 
 were not altogether attributable to the republicans, he was made an 
 outcast and an exile, and this cruel treatment brought him to death's 
 door. 
 
 Sir, this report talks about republicans holding office in Louisiana. 
 Is it a crime to hold office? AVhere are we to get the material of a 
 republican pai'ty when you concentrate upon us a cii'cle of fire that 
 consumes every man within its limits? I assert it here to-day that 
 if any democrat in the State of Louisiana should accept with good 
 faith, and with the intention of protecting and conserving the inter- 
 ests of his fellow-citizens, an appointment from Goveruor Kellogg, he 
 would be a tabooed man, and he would be as an alien and a stranger 
 among his neighbors. 
 
 Mr. President, it might be expected that I should say something 
 about tlie causes of these political and social contentious in Louisiana, 
 and that I should suggest some way of allaying them. To recount 
 all these causes would weary your patience, even were I familiar with 
 them all. The bitterness of past strife — the fall fi'om affluence to pov- 
 erty consequent upon that strife — the necessity to labor consequent 
 upon that fall— contact witli the cause of all this in the presence of 
 the old slave now in many cases the dominating political instrument-— 
 changing channels of trade — failing crops and tiooded fields — paralysis 
 of capital— shrinking of investments in dismay from the insecurity 
 engendered by strife and turbulence — greed of office whose emoluments 
 are simply an imjtosition and an outrage upon an impoverished peo- 
 ple — stimulatingsympathiesfromnorthernallies, who in their partisan 
 zeal encourage the employment of unlawful means to set aside the 
 constitutional amendments and the reconstruction and insurrection 
 laws of the United States — immunity from punishment for crimes — 
 martyrdom and adulation for suifering inuler the hated law, however 
 much deserved — serveto make up a comprehensive demoralization that 
 saps and corrupts a civilization. • 
 
 There are other evils. There are evils directly traceable and 
 chargeable to the republican jjarty. I will admit it. But when I 
 am defending my house against the assaults of my mortal ene- 
 mies on the outside, I have not time to reform the abuses existing 
 within my doors. We liave shown our intention, ay, we have shown 
 our pei-formances in the last few years to better and to remedy 
 the condition of affairs. We have relaxed the stringency of laws ; 
 we have reduced taxation ; we have yielded to all the demands for 
 
reform aucl good goveruinent ; but they do not stop their murders, 
 and until they do you must mouse us that we give more attention to 
 the more serious matters that occupy us. 
 
 With respect to our political organism, it was created by the re- 
 construction acts as completely as would have been the case had the 
 State neither previous political existence nor history. A new and a 
 controlling element, an element without education, without experi- 
 ence, and naturally antagonistic politically to the intelligence and 
 property and the wealth of the State, has been put in charge of that 
 State. Could you expect anything else but disorder ? You had no 
 right to expect anything else, but your remedy for yoiir disorder is 
 not mine. You propose, as was i)roposed in 1861, to seek redress of 
 your grievances outside of the law. I stand under the law, and I will 
 do my manful best to retxieve them all, to rectify them all. By re- 
 volt, by violence, by murder, the democrats of Louisiana j)roj>ose to 
 get their wrongs redressed. I propose to do them fair and equal 
 justice, to condemn corruption, to condemn wrong-doing, whether 
 outside of or within the republican party ; but if there is a jiarty of 
 thieves, which I deny, I will uphold the j)arty of thieves against the 
 party of murderers. 
 
^^ 
 
 _4"'