The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1874-12-12
THE RETURNING BOARD.
Desoto Parish Thrown Out.


lated the facts connected with the returns OF
DeSoto parish-the disappearance OF the
Supervisor with tho said papers. his
otter endeavor to dispose OF them by
sale. the fact Oh their being IN the
hands of Lou Dudley, her connecflvn
Herewith, in the capacity Of broker, the I'M
possibility Of getting the papers by writ OF
,eauestration on the order of the board, and
requested, inasmuch as these returns were not
present, that the clerk Of the court OF DeSoto
parish, Mr. Reynolds was in the room with
duplicate originals Of the returns, and that
the board canvass these returns
Mr.. Wells said that there were no returns
before the board upon which to act. He
claimed that Mr.. Reynolds was not properly
authorized to bring to the board any returns,
or rather, duplicate returns from the parish;
that the papers had not been transmitted by
The proper officer, and the board could not
receive them. Mr.. Arroyo procured the re-
turns from Mr.. Reynolds and placed them
On the table.
They were contained in sealed envelopes,
',ut Mr.. Wells declined to open them, main
tanning that they were not, or could not. be
considered as the legal returns. He said that
If the majority Of the board saw fit to receive
The papers, it was well and good, but his
ruling was that they could not be received.
Mr.. Arroyo then requested AIr. Reynolds,
The clerk from DeSoto parish. to open the
packages. This was done, and the statements
and tally sheets were examined.
Here MI. Whitaker and Mr.. Zacharie es-
saved to make some remarks with reference
to the matter, but Wells affirmed positively
that it was useless to make any argument, as
the ruling of the Board would be maintained.
Mr.. Anderson, after looking over the papers,
said that he could not regard them as legal
evidence of the result Of the election, but was
willing to consider them for what they are
worth.
MIR. Arroyo produced q certificate, signed
by Bean, the supervisor Of DeSoto parish,
stating that the duplicate returns which were
produced were true and correct copies OF the
original, in his possession.
Wells maintained however, that there was
nothing before the board showing the result
of the election held in that parish, and put it
to a vote of the board whether his ruling
would be sustained. It was. and DeSoto
parish is thus thrown out.
Thereupon Mr.. Arroyo offered the follow
ing protest
The undersigned. member Of the Return
ing Board, protests against the decision Of the
Board in rejecting the duplicate original cleo
ton returns offered to establish the vote of
the parish of DeSoto because the Supervisor
of Registration Of the said parish had failed
to transmit the report required Of him by
law for the following reasons
/. Because for the wanton and criminal
failure of the Registrar in filing with the
Board the compilation of votes, election re-
turns, and tally lists Of the Commissioners Of
Election in the parish of DeSoto the people
of the parish cannot and should not be de-
prived of the rights which they have had to
manifest their choice for officers. When all the
forms of law have been complied with, and
when that manifestation has been expressed
through the recognized ballot-box, the sane
tity and purity Of which should remain in
violate and sacred, and in the absence Of such
documents, the next step, to arrive at the de-
sired conclusion, is to compare the election re-
turns filed by the Commissioners of Election
the Supervisor of Registration, with the Clerk
of the District Court for said parish, now in
this city and offered to be canvassed and COM
piled.
3 Because the action of the Board in this
case is a reversal of its decision in the case of
the Tenth Ward of this city, where in the alb
sence of the regular return this Board has
sent for the ballot-box, in the possession of
the clerk of the court, and the same was
adopted by the Board.
3. Because the duplicate originals rendered
to the Board are equal in authenticity and
dignity to the duplicate in the hands of the
Supervisor of Registrations; that they are
legal records of the court, deposited by vir-
tue of law for the sole purpose OF being used
in evidence before any court, board. or any
other legal tribunal, and only differ from the
returns of the Supervisor in that they lack
the usual transmission by that officer, whose
functions are only ministerial in that regard.
l. Because, if the failure OF the Supervisor
of Registration to make his statement to the
board prevents the board from examining
the original duplicate returns, or certified
copies thereof then the entire result of an
election depends not on the vote Of the people
legally cast, but on the unrestrained voice of
the Supervisor.
j. Because the Supervisor being an ap-
ppiutee of the Executive would hold in his
hands the returns OF an election, then giving
to the Executive complete and absolute con-
troll of the entire vote of the State, opening
the door to frauds in favor of the political
party to which the Executive may happen to
belong. OSCAR ARROYO.
The protest was received and filed. on the
vuling Of the President, who said that he also
desired. for reasons which he would offer for
the ruling that be spread upon the minutes.
There are twenty-six contested parishes,
the names of which will be found below. In the
eases Of many Of them much additional testi-
mony will have to be filed, and by consent of
all the members Of the board these cases
were postponed until Monday, to allow the
ling of this evidence.
The cases of Carroll and Iberia parishes