The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1876-11-23
LOUISIANA.
Full Text of the Pcli icai Troubles in
| that State.
THE REPLY.

NEW ORLEANS. November l6-The fol-
lowing Is tue reply u the K pub.Icans TO the
comm uulcntlon from the Democrats invit-
ing q conference:
new ORLEANS, November l6, 1876
Gentlemen: The majority OF the under
eigned, to whom your note OF the l4th inst.
was addressed, only arrived in this city
yesterdaylevening. We have, therefore, been
unable 10 reply until this forenoon, and
only regret that YOUR communication should
have gone TO the pres Immediately upon
its delivery and without tine possibility OF
an answer accompanying it. Your remark
that YOU are informed that We come at the
request Of the President, TO see that the
Board Of Csnvassers make fair count OF
the votes actually cast. and ask that We
meet and confer, in order that such infiu-
ence rs We may possess may be exerted on
behalf of such canvass OF the Votes actu-
aily cast, as BY its fairness and impartial
ity shall comm and the respect and acqui-
escence Of the American people OF all par
ties, We join, heartily, with you In counseis
of peace in the expression of an earnest de-
sire for perfectly hoLest and jus; declare
ton of the rerults of the election IN
Louisiana, BY its lawfully constituted
authorities, and We may add that we know
of no reason to doubt that such declsra-
ton will be made, but We do not see the
propriety or utility of conference on bases
and subject to the limitations you propo-e,
for We have no such duty imposed on u,
and a. suggested by the clause OF your note
first quo ed, We are, at most, requested TO be
witnesses Of what shall occur in the canvass
Of the votes, without power or legal IN
fuence over the result, or over the means
by which, under the laws Of Louisiana, the
re.ul, Is to be determined. We cannot
doubt that in this you, upon reflection, will
concur with US. We are here as private
citizens, with no official powers we, there.
tore, cannot supercede or modify any law oil
that State, nor have We any right to control OF
influence any Of its officers as to the man
ner in which they shall perform the minis.
tsrial or judicial duties imposed upon them
bv its laws, and should We, being strangers
and without official functions, attempt this
we would be condemned by the people Of
every State in the Union for an improper in
reference with its local administration.
The following extract from the laws OF Lou
| isiana show that the canyasslng board l;
expressly requested in certain cases to exer
| else judicial az we'll as ministerial functions
| "sEcTIoN 3. That in such canvass ano
compilation, the returning officers shall OBJ
| .erye the following order: They shall com
pile first, q statement from all polls or voting
places at which there shall have bern u
lair and peaceable registration and election
and whenever, from any poll or vOtin.
place there shall be received the statemen
of any supervisor Of registration or com
missioner Of election, in form, as required
by section 20 of the act, an affidavit o
three or more citizens, of any riot, tumuit
act, of violence, intimidation, armed dis
turbance, bribery, or corrupt influences
which prevented, or tended TO pre-
vent, q fair, free, and peaceable vot
of all qualified electors entitled
to vote at such polls voting place
such returning officers shall not CANVASS tn
count or compile the statements from suct
polls or voting place until the statement
from all other polls or voting places sb al
have been canvassed and compiled. LII
returning officers shall then proceed to in
ve.tigate the statements of the riot, tumult
acts of violence, intimidation, armed dis
turbances, bribery, or corrupt influences,
any such poll or voting place, AMI, il, iron
the evidence Of such statement, they shall
be convinced that such riot, tumult, acts o
violence, intimidation, armed disturbances
bribery, or corrupt influences, did not ma
terially interfere with the purity and free
dom Of the election at such poll OF votin
place, or did not prevent a sufficient mum
Der of qualified voters thereat from regis
tering or voting, to materially change tn
result Of the election, then and, not other
wise, said returning officers shall canvas
and compile the vote OF srch poll or vOtin,
place with those previously canvassed ant
complied, but If the said returning officer
shall not be fully satisfied thereof, 1t shall
be their duty to examine further testimon
in regard thereto, and to this end the
shall have power to send for pei
soma and papers. If, after such examination
the said returning officers shall be convinc
ed that said riot, tumult acts Of vic
Ience, etc., did materially interfere with tn
purity or freedom of the election at suc'
poll or voting place as to prevent sufi
cient number OF the qualified voters there's
from registering and voting, to materially
change the result of the election, then sal
returning officers shall not canvass or com
nile the statement of the votes OF sach pol
or voting place, but shall exclude it from
their returns, providing that any person in
terested in said election, by reason Of bein
a candidate for any Office, shalt be allowe'
hearing before said returning officers up
on making application within the tim
allowed for the forwarding of the return
of said elections
Hence, if there are any facts requIrIn
the Judgment of the board upon the valid
ity OF any election, or returning as affects
by such frauds or violence. II would be
manifest interference with State rights an,
local self-government for persons like our
selves, without official right, to attempt +
influence or control its judicial action
Had a corresponding board in the State o
New York, in 1868, been authorized TO pas
upon the fraudulent returns of votes Of tn,
city of New York that year, an
a delegation of citizens of Louisiana
however respectable. attempted to influence
its judicial action upon the facts presentet
to it under the laws OF that State, such al
attempt would have been universally con
demned. II the duties. Of the canvassinI
board of Louisiana were merely ministeria
or clerical, as in case of any officer charges
BY Law with the duty of verifying and dc
claring the result of any election, and in
vestigating, with no discretion, as when thu
President of the Senate counts and declare
the votes of the electors of the severa
States in the election Of President and Vice
President under the Constitution of thu
United States, q diff rent case would b
presented. 1t il, in our judgment, vital &c
the preservation of constitutional liberty
that the habit Of obedience to the forms o
law should be eedulously incubated ant
cultivated, and that the resort to extra
constitutional modes of redress for ever
actual grievances should be avoided ant
condemned as revolutionary, disorgsnizin,
and tending to disorder anarchy. To re
duce the whole question, therefore, TO tn
mere clerical duty of counting the vote
actually cast, as proposed BY you, withou
power to reject fraudulent votes, in distinc
ton from votes legally cast and returned
irrespective of the question whether the
are fraudulently or violently cas-
q multiplication of the provisions of th'
laws of Louisiana, which have alread!
been adjudicated n valid by the Suprem,
Court and would be wholly unjustiiabl'
here, as we'll a in any other State of tn
Union, which had provided laws to protec
the rights of voters and the purity Of tn
ballot. We cannot, therefore, concur il
your proposition for q conference on tina
basis. [SigDed.1
John Shermsn, Stanley Mathews, ]. A
Garfield, Ohio; VIM. d. Kelley, Pennsyl
vania; John A. Kaeon, Iowa; L. W
Stoughton, New York; C. l. Dity, Mary
land NJ. H. Van Allen, New York Eu
gene Hale, Maine; N. S Quay, Pennsylva
mia; wm. Cumback, Indiana; E. F. Moves
J. f Stevenson, Ohio; John Coburn, Lev
Wallace. Indiana; John Tuttle, w. A. N
Grew, J. W. Chapman, W. r Smith, Iowa
J. N. Taylor. 8 r Haven, J. N; Be:rd.ley