The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1872-01-11
The Bowen and De Large Contest.

The Washington correspondent of the New
York Tribune sends to that paper the following
interesting items in regard to the contested
election case in the House of Representatives
from South Carolina: ~ e-...s
Mr.. Charles w. Buttz, the attorney for the
Hon. Robert @. De Large, in the contested case
of Bowen against De Large, from the I'd Con-
gressional District of South Carolina, says that
he has not, as it'has been alleged, suppressed
the testimony taken by him for his client in Or
der to advance the interests of Mr.. Bowen,
but as possible means of forcing payment for
his services, and for the expenses he has in
engaged for five months taking testimony, for
which he charged fee of 81 900, and that
there is an additional sum of $500 which he
spent for his client. According to Mr.. Butts
statement, De Large deceived him several times
with promises to pay, which he failed to keep,
and Buttz, suspecting that his client despaired
of succeeding in the contest, and meant to
throw up the case, finally informed De Large
that if he would give him an order for his Jam
uary pay, upon the Sergeant-at-Arms of the
House, the testimony taken would be at once
filed with the Elections Committee. De Large
refused to do this, and did not come on when
Congress met Buttz informed the committee
of these facts, and declined to file the evidence.
He says that the committee sustains him in his
course.
If all the facts connected with the election
in the Charleston District were brought to light,
curious chapter Of political history would be
furnished De Large's candidacy in that dis
trict it is said, was the result of a quarrel be-
tween Governor Scott and C. @. Bowen. Bow
en- was very strong in Charleston city and coun-
ty, where he had been. Freedman's Bureau
agent, the negroes, believing that everything the
Bureau did for them was done by Bowen per-
sonally. He got 1000 majority in that coun-
ty. There are three other counties in the dis
trict-Barnwell, Colleton, and Beaufort. The
first two gave majorities for De Large, which
left Bowen with about 400 majority, with
Beaufort to hear from. The vote of this coun-
ty was kept back purposely, it is alleged, until
the others could be heard from, the election law
allowing the County Commissioners to keep the
ballot boxes in their houses for ten days.
When it was found how many votes were wan.
ted from Beaufort a messenger was dispatched
from Charleston and Beaufort promptly re-
turned 5000 majority for De Large, which elec-
ted him by 600mgority. The Commissioners
were tried for this fraud, and are now serving
out term of two years in Jail. Frauds were
also committed in Colleton county. One of the
Commissioners of Election, who had acted as
census-taker, and had returned the number of
voters at one precinct as 600, certified to ma
jority of 1900 for De Large at the same pre-
cinct; and afterward, when arrested, acknowl-
edged that he and his confederate Commission
er had put $50 De Large votes into the box be-
fore opening the poll. These men were not
tried. The District Attorney, who was friend
of Bowen, entered mol. pros, after getting
their evidence to file in the contest before Con-
gress. These facts are instructive, as illustra-
ting how elections are held in South Carolina
under law that facilitates fraud.