Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-04-21
UNION AND AMERICAN.
TIE LOUISIANA CASE.
An Able and Exhaustive Review
of Its Legal Aspects.
BY Hon. ThOs. VI. Cooley, Author OF
constitutional Limitations,
April No. Southern Law Review.
CONCLUDED

[CONCLUDED.l
We are now in the history Of those prc
Ceedings brought to the election Of 1871
and the action Of the Returning Board VI
der it. Only one State officer was to b
chosen at this election, but the whole bod
of representatives, consisting Of one hun
dred and eleven, were to be elected. A
has already been said the whole election
machinery was in the hands of the Gov
ernOr. Moreover, Federal supervisors haC
been appointed 10 watch the proceedings
and there was no reason to expect that tht
sympathies of these officers would b,
against the Governors party. The first re
ports Of the election would, therefore, nat.
urally favor that party, inasmuch as they
would come from or be based upon the &C.
ton of friendly officials. Those reports
gave a clear majority to the Conservative
or Opposition ticket for the State Office,
and fixed the majority Of the Conservative
in the House at 20. Of the general accu-
racy Of these reports no doubt was felt in
the country. But this was before the Re
turning Board had begun its work.
We have not the space at our command
board. Suffice it to say, that it remained
III 6Eo54Uu AN GENCLdl WEEhss Justly ELu-
plOyed in upSetting the election that had
taken place. A part Of the time it held
open session, and admitted parties interest
ed, and their counsel, and a part of the
time it held what was called executive
session." by which was meantOnly that the
doors were closed and public OBJ
serYatiOn excluded. Gradually in
executive session. the Conservative
--s a. c. r.
shown by the returns made by the officials
sympathizing with tins board, was cut down
TO nothing, by rejecting whatever vas ne
cessaIy to that end, and q comfortable ma
jOrity counted up for the opposing candi-
date. At the same time the conservative
majority in the house was intended to be
destroyed by a like process; ffty-three re-
publicans being returned as chosen, and
ffty-three conservatives, according to the
classification of Gov. kellogg; and five
cases were held too doubtful for the board
TO pass upon, and their cases were referred
TO the house itself for decision. Perhaps
this permission of the board to the house to
pass upon five seals out ofOne hundred and
eleven, was considered a method Of saving
70 the house its constitutional privileged
Nor shall we stop to characterize these
proceedings beyond saying, that in most Of
the cases in which the board assumed to
set aside the returns, and give seats TO
members not shown TO be chosen, they
acted without a shadow Of justification. In
most Of the cases there was no protest
from the local officers, and no pretence Of
u~nfairness, except what the board was able
TO discover in Executive session. The
congressional committee, which afterwards
investigated, have given specimens, one Of
which we trsnscribe:
1.-THE Parish Of Rapides chose three members
70 the legislature. The returns elected all three
conservatives. When the proofs closed, the only
papers flied with the board was the affidavit Of
the United States supervisor that the election
was in al respects full, fair and free. 1t was not
known in The parish that any contest existed
against those members. They left their homes
y proceeded 10 New Orleans 10 be present at
the opening Of the legislature, no intimatiOn Of
COntesting their Seats, or objection 20 their cleo
tiOn, having been given by tEelr opponents. At
one Of their last sessions, the returning board de-
clared all the republican members elected from
that parish. When the papers Of the returning
board we're produced before your committee
there was found among them an ahdaylt by MI.
Wells, the president Of the board, declaring that
intimidation had existed at certain polls in that
parish, and that the returns from that parish
should therefore be rejected. The COunselfO for the
Iconservativel COMMITTEES testified that they had
no opportunity 20 contradict the OF
this paper; that they had never seen or known OF
II before; and, that upon an examination Of the
papers before the board when the proofs closed,
It was not among them
The committee further report, that an in
ouiry into the facts showed that Mr.. Wells
was not in the parish Of Rapides on the day
Of the election, and had, therefore, deliber-
ately sworn TO facts of which be could have
had no knowledge. Moreover, they find as
a fact that his affidavit was false. They
made repeated efforts to obtain some ex-
planaGon from this official, but without
avail. They were "therefore constrained
TO declare that the action Of the returning
board. in the rejection Of these returns in
the parish of Rapides, and giving the seats
in that parish to republican candidates, was
arbitrary, unfair and without warrant of
law" The board, or the false affidavit of
its president, regarding a subject Of which
he had no knowledge, had not only counted
out members for "intimidation,' but had
also counted in members not elected, on a
supposition chat without intimidation they
would have been chosen, What power they
possessed to look into the hearts Of electors,
and ascertain what UneXpressed purpose lay
hidden there, We know not, but We venture
to say there is not another State in the
IulOl III Will q EChGl3l NA4l &c bAA~ HI
limitation has existed at a poll would be
held TO warrant an election board in count
ING in candidates on no other evidence than
that a msi0rity Of votes was cast against
Them But when a board is to act upon
the sole evidence Of its presiding Officer
and leading spirit, which be, at least, know:
Is baseless, it must be exceedingly difficult
70 set a limit to its discretion.
With a clerk of their own party to cal
the roll, and half the members Of the same
affiliations, the board had reasonable
ground for believing that the organization
of the house was in their own hands
especially as one member returned as a
Conservative was counted as unreliable
With the lower house organized in Tx
kellogg interest, the iudicial-militaTy gov
eminent would be fastened upon the people
for another two years. And why not per
manently? If two elections NAV be ma
nipulated in disregard Of the Constitution
9Th following cases may usefully be consult.
ed In this connection. Reuner Y. Bennett. 2