The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1868-11-26
THE OFFICIAL VOTE.

The real vote of the State of Louisiana
showed Democratic majority Of about
| $1,000. The official return will show
Democratic majority of about IL, OOO we pre-
sumo This result has been reached by ex-
GLIDING the vote of Orleans Jefferson, St
| Martin, Sabine, st. John the Baptist, st.
| Bernard, and perhaps others. The decision
/ of the Board of State Canvassers, in these
cases, had no reference, we understand, to the
points on which the defeated Radical candi-
dates purpose to claim seats in Congress, but
solely to certain points of form, involving the
legality of the returns. 1t appears that under
the law the returns from the parish of Or
leans are to be made by board of three super
visors in each municipal district and three for
the Right Bank. These officers were never
appointed, and the State canvassers take
the ground that the functions Of the
ward supervisors terminated with the
conclusion of the registration. Under these
circumstances a return by the sheriff
would have been accepted, but the returns
never, we understand came into the posses.
sion of that officer. We think the decision
in the case of this parish is wrong. The sup
Elementary law of the Legislature allows the
board of registrars to appoint as many adj
ditional supervisors as they may deem neces-
sasy.-Thus twelve, instead of three, were
appointed for the First District, and it APP.
pears to that these possessed precisely
the powers and functions bestowed by the
original act, on the three provided for by that
law. 1t could not affect their legal power to
make returns, that they were instructed to
limit the exercise of their functions to certain
portions of the District, and that they obeyed
the instructions. If the Legislature really
intended that three supervisors should be
appointed simply to receive and forward the
returns, then Baker and his board are
guilty of culpable neglect in emitting
to appoint these officers, and thus afford
ing an opportunity for the practical dis
franchisement of the whole voting population
of the city of New Orleans. 1t is very un-
fortunate that the board of State canvassers
has taken this ground, because they will
hardly be able to convince the public that
their ruling was not dictated by partisan mo-
tives. Moreover, it seems to us that, in such
situation, they should at least have given
the oppositeEparty hearing through some of
the eminent members of the bar of this city.
1t may be very true that the result is not
affected as to the electoral ticket by this pro-
ceeding but it is not pleasant for the voters
Of New Orleans to know that their splendid
majority of %, 600 counts for nothing. Asto
the vote for Congressman, difference will
be made in the Second District, where, we
presume, Mr.. Sheldon, who was beaten about
$4,000 votes, will get the certificate. The
only parishes counted in this district are La
fourche, st. Charles and st. James. If Con-
gress acts with any sort of fairness, Mr.
Sheldon's possession of the certifcate-Me-
nard, we believe, gets it for the vacancy
will avail him very little. A mere informality
in making returns never has been permitted
to vitiate an election.
In the cases OF the country parishes there
have been, it seems, other informalities. In
some of them the sheriffs have made the re-
turns, instead of the supervisors and, in
these instances, the vote has been excluded.