New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-11-20
Tur rns1oN RETuRN1Na BOARD.


induced us to look into the practice OF It's
founders, the Fusionists. What will
these malcontents say when we prove
from the record that the Fusion founders
did exactly what the election laws OF 1871
and 1872 authorized to be done, but ex-
actly what the attorneys now say can not
lawfully be done? Under the same legal
authority the Forman Returning Board
appointed under the act of November,
1872, canvassed the whole election re-
turns, and excluded the following polls
for causes stated:
l. Poll eight, third ward, New Orleans,
excluded on the affidavit of DR.. }. u.
Bruins and others, showing abstraction
and stuffing of tickets. Poll eight, ward
three, this year gave Republican 2S9,
Democratic 65.
2. Poll three, parish OF JEFFERSON ior
stufing and abstraction.
3. The whole vote of Iberia parish, IN
consequence of violence and intimidation
The vote of iberia, as stated in the legls-
lative report, was 965 Republican, GIG
Fusion. Total vote excluded 1881.
4. The whole vote of the parish OF st.
James, s'because the returns are incom-
plete and the ballot box was taken posses
sion of by armed men unauthorized to
do so" The poll Of st. James, as stated by
the Legislature, was 1880 Republican,
GG2 Fusion. Total vote excluded 2492.
5. The whole of the parish of st. Mar
tin, on account of violence and intimida-
ton at the polls by limited States troops
and armed bands of colored men styling
themselves United States marshals." The
poll of st. Martin, as stated by the Legls-
lature, was, Republican 7O7, Fusion 6O6.
Total vote excluded 1913.
Here, then, we have two ward polls and
three parish polls excluded, and Herewith
the votes of something less than three
persons.
1t will be seen from this that the Fusion
Returning Board threw out and excluded
not only the vote OF individuals, but Of
whole parishes. and ward polls; that
they did so, on individual affidavits, al
legine fraud and intimidation. To con-
firm this history the better in the memory
of those controverting the exercise of the
same power, by the same authority, we
extract from the sworn testimony of MIR.
Forman, given before the Senate commit.
tee:
Question: will ask, if in that canvass
you made OF those returns you examined
them as to the electors for President and
Vice President
Answer-We did not.
Question-In making your count of the
vote did you reject any Of those returns!
Answer-1es, sir. We rejected . few.
Here are those We rejected.
[They are as. and for the causes, stated
above.l
QUESTIONABLE those all!
Answer-Those arc all. There Is the list
and our explanation. Although the law
cause it would give more satisfaction.
It will be observed that we make no
charge of dishonesty against the Forman
Returning Board. Our object is to estab'
lish the proper authority Of the present
board by the practice Of its predecessor.
Heis asked:
yuestion-Poli three. Jefferson .,aris'ls
Answer-Thers were 555 Fnslan tickets
and not single Republican ticket. while
it was known to be Republican precinct.
Qaestion-Was that d Republican ward
or district!
Answer-Yes, sir; and these atfidavits
were produced. There were t5a Fusion
tickets and not single Republican ticket,
and we thought it conclusive evidence OF
fraud and did not count them.
QuestiOn-Yoa came to that conclusion
unanimously 49,.
Answer-Yes, sir; 10 everything we did
believe the board acted unanimously.
Let us add that the polls from Terre'
honne and st. Tammany did not ''srriye
in time" The returns from Iberville
were only ''meager and informal" Mr..
Torman was asked in regard to these:
Ouestion-Wero they counted at all!
Answer~No, sir.
Ouestion>-Were there no returns!
Answer-They were not signed by the
proper officers.
Il was then the unanimous opinion Of
the Fusion board that where district is
strongly Of one party. and that party re-
ceives no vote. this whole district vote
may be set aside and excluded for such
cause.
1t threw out a whole parish poll be.
cause the returns were ''only meager and
informal"
1t may be noted. also. that this board
construed the presence Of United States
troops at an election as cause Of intimi-
dation. and it pronounces. e, ca'Aedra.
the appointment Of deputy marshals OF
the. United States unauthorized officers.
This is certainly claiming large discse.
ton in determining the validity Of al
election. .........
But the Fusion board ascends to far
higher prerogatiyes. The Senate COM
mittee asks:
Ouestion-You rejected tho whole vote
Of Iberia.
Answer-Yes, sir.
Question-What was the whole vote:
Answer--Y can not recollect.
Question.-Was it several thousandy
AnsweY-i. would be impossible for me
now to give il. ! remember we made a
rough guess. or hardly Is rough guess, but a
based on the best information
We could get OF what the votes in that par.
ish were. aud i. would not have made any
difference in she result Of the State ticket.
Gu. stion--What is that!
Answe,---We made calculation Of what
4k.. xnea or SaanlN s.,ould haua s>ean IL all