New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-12-17
Judge Trunbull,s Report.

The proclamation by General Palmer an
Judge Trumbull. of the New Orleans Den
ocrstic committee, has been given to tb
public. 1t is singulsrly weak paper. l
has all the technicality OF lawyer attack
ing the suf6ciency Of an Indictment, bu
lacks the candid presentation Of blunt facta
The country wanted facts, and this pape
omits to give them. Beyond tho mere state
| ment that the duplicate returns of the cleo
ton furnished tho Democratic eommitte,
showed over 5000 moro votes than tn,
Canvassing Board counted; that of tn,
votes rejected II, 600 were Democratic, ani
over 1000 Republican, tho committee xivea
NO light to enable the pubic to form n
opinion - to the validity Of tn.
Of the paper is to the eject tSs'
in 1874 the State Legislsturs sssoted
new election law, which In express
terms repealed al previous laws On thai
subject, and that the new election Law con
tains NO provision for IN election Of presi
Dental electors Ut all. If. however, the new
law can Do construed ~ leaving in force %
much Of tho old INV - provided for the
election of presidential electors, then under
that law the returns of the vote for presi
Dental electors can only be canvaesa0 BY
tho Governor and State officers, and the
Canvassing Board had no jurisdiction over
the returns for electors, and their assump-
ton OF authority to CANVAS such returns
was usurpstion. This IL purely technical;
question Of the repeal of one Law and the
substitution of another. Had there been
such defect in the law somebody would
have discovered it before the election, and
raising the point now is confession of its
utter weakness.
9The facts about which the country wanted
information we're: Was there fair election
or mott Wore the people of oil degrees
and conditions allowed to vote with such
freedom and in such numbers and free of
such fear and of actual violence as to iusti.
fy the presumption that the election was Q
fair one3 On these, the only material
points in the case, Messrs. Palmer and
Trumbull furnish NO information. They
make the point that in several cases the re-
port OF violence and intimidation at certain
polls did not accompany the returns, but
was furnished afterward, and that subse-
quent to the election testimony was re-
ceived owing that such violence and in
timidatiOn had existed. The objection il
not to the sufficiency of tho testimony to
establish the fact, but to the time when it
was received. This also is Q technicslity
not going to the merits.
The Democratic committee also object
that the Returning Board announced the
totals for the electors and did not give the
vote OF parishes, 30 that it could be seen
What they counted and what they excluded.
Tho reason for this was that the canvass
was completed only few hours before the
electors were to meet and vote, ana since
then the vote by parishes for Governor and
other State officers has been published in
detail in tho New Orleans papers. The
question ut Issue was: Did the CsnvsssiuQ
Board reject votes which had been i'm.
peachedi and on this point Messrs. Trum.
hill and Dnls <nvm&nk -
dence; they con6ne themselves to IN as
sumption of fraud because tho revised re.
turns show majority for Hayes. Chicago
Tribune.