New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1859-11-03
VOLUME XII.
Nem Orleans lailp Grestent.
THURSDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 3, 1859.
"FACTs AND FIGURES. >,

/
points involved in it, showed that the administra
ton of Criminal Justice in this city was uuprcce
dentedly efficient; and that the municipal Police
had within given period, done more work ant
arrested more persons than probably any othe,
I Police Of the same number, and under the same
circumstances, had in any other city on the surface
OF the globe. These facts we demonstrated by the
production Of unmstakable official figures and We
called the attention Of the public thereunto in sncl
language as we then deemed and as we deem now
just and appropriate.
We were led to this on account of the systcInati,
1etraction, on one hand, and ignorant detractior
on the other, which had been indulged in against
both the Criminal Court and the Police-lcadine
many worthy people to believe that the Cour
was incapable, if not worse, and the Police
inefficient and lazy, if not positively dishonest
The figures we presented proved exactly the re
verse; and we have the satisfaction Of stating thai
many hundreds of voters have been undeceived
and now, having their eyes opened are prepared te
do full justice to these much and causeiessly ma
ligned departments of our government.
Two Of our cotemporaries-tll Delta and the
Courcr-had, in their yesterday mornings eli
ton, replies to our article of Monday morning
The Delta devotes two studied, pondcrous col
umns to us, and the Courier comes out with a
goody portion of 4 column. We have read the
Delta's article over with some degree of care and
we are sorry to say, find little in it to reply to-
We made plainly defined issues, familiar to most OF
our people, and gave figures and facts to support
them 1t starts out by quoting one of Sir Walter
Scott's novels against us, and in maintenance Of
itself! Now, we are a great admrer of Sir Walter,
and were he alive, We would be afraid to meet
him i'll controversial debate; and, although We do
not apprehcnd anything serious from the Delta, we
respectfully suggest that the use made Of the
glorious old Scotchman's name and works was nm
warranted
Our contemporaries dodge quite ingeniously the
main points of our artice-the sterling admins
Police Department in this city-and devote them
selves mainly to a defence of the Plaquemines
frauds of 1874 and the election frauds in this city
in 1853. The Delta refers to a man who died a
natural death to make its allegations good, and
cites man who died violent death on account
of the Plaquemines proceedings of 1871, for the
same purpose. With this we have nothing to do.
nor is it pertinent to the subject. All the world
knows that tremendous frauds were perpetrated
in Plaquemines in 1914: and even the Delta ad.
+,
o. has been polled since' PlaquemineS has in
creased immensely in wealth and population
" since" 1874. 1t seems to US that the Delta Is
bringing up the name Of man. who died a bloody
death on the field of honor because of that very
vote, is singularly inappropriate.
Our Contemporaries then refer to 1853, and the
elections in November of that year. after the most
fearful epidemic that had ever desoated our me.
tropolis and carried to their long homes thousands
and thousands of our citizens. On this point their
arguments are singularly lame and untenable. They
neither meet the issue, as presented, or contro-
vert it in any important particular. Here is what
we stated in Mondays Crescent: " Previous to
1858 the highest vote of New Orleans had been
about 10000. In November 1853. after the most
horrible and unutterably awful yellow fever cpl
demic this city had ever suffered" the g vote
swelled, if our memory serves us correctly, con-
siderdbly dbore thirteen thousand" The Delta
admits that the vote of 1853 was 1901; +; and that
=" the vote on the same day, The gear before, was
l0,4G2." In 1852 the Presidential election took
place. Generals Pierce and Scott were the oppos-
ing candidates. The summer was as healthy as that
of 1853 There was no yellow fever. Party spirit
ran high, and politicians of all classes grades and
conditions, were at tfeyer heat. The extreme health
fulness of the season had brought all our citizens
home long before the election. What was the sum
total of the ballots, under these extraordinarily
favorable circumstances? Why, the Delta tells us,
l0,462! Yet it claims that no frauds were perpe.
trated in 1858, one year afterwards, when we had
been scourged with the most frightful epidemic
ever known to the city-when it states that the
total mortality in 1883 from fever, was less than
I 1yxylo IoJ eli
vote of the previous healthy year nearly three
thousand ballots
We shall argue against no such absurditv as this.
According to the Detas theory, if 10000 people
die, and the circumstances are as unfavorable as
possible the vote of city canbe honestly increased
30O0 Tocarry out its own parallel if 10000 people
should de- an increase of Is, 900 might reasonably
be expected; and if our whole population, root
and branch, shouldbe cut off by the yellow scourge
of the tropics why then the number of legal voters
would be correspondngly enlarged! Now, by
reducing our cotemporary's theory to practice an
Intelligent public will see what it leads to.
Then the Delta takes another tack, and falls into
error as usual Endeavorng to defend Mr.. Slidel
and his friends against the alleged election frauds
of 1853, it says, referring to the Crescent:
The alleged excessive and fraudulent vote of
1853 is charged to the same "cool, indomitable
shrewd, all-powerfnl, arch manager" who had
proposed and executed all the other frauds in the
State. What preposterous assertion The gen.
tlenan to whom reference has been made was not
in the city during the canvass of 1853. He had
been elected to the Senate few months before by
the Legislature of 1852, and was quietly enioynr
his honors abroad. The Democratic candidates for
Congress and the Legislature were generally un.
friendly to him. and he had no special, personal or
political purposes to promote in that election and
the party did not need his services.
Why cannot our cotemporary get things right
once In a while? Why does the Delta almost inya-
riably persist in error when it refers to facts and
figures? Speaking of the election of 1853, the
Delta says that the Democratic candidates for
Congress and the Legislature were generally un-
friendly to him, (Mr. SlidelD and he had no special,
personal or political purposes to promote i'll that
election, and the party did not need his services"
Mr. Sdell is now serving out six years term
in the United States Senate. That term expires
March 4th, 1861. Pursuant to the Constitution of
the State he must have been elected to his present
term on the fourth Monday of January, 1856. Ac-
cording to the Delta, Mr.. Slidell chad no special,
personal or political purposes to promote" by car
ryng the election of 1853 Why bless your innocent
soul, the Senators and Representatives to the Le-
gislature chosen in 1858, and who took their seats
first on the third Monday in January, 1854, elected
Dir. slidell to his present Office and to fill his own
vacancy, on the fourth Monday of January, 1855,
The election to which the Delta refers, while Mr.,