The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1876-11-19

proper lnuetlciciHN Win INC local aG-
lnnistration.
The following extract from the laws o,
Louisiana shows that the canvassing
board is expressly requested in certain
eases TO exercise judicial rs well as minis !
tcrial functions:
SIC. 3. That in such canvass and COM
pilatioD, the returning Officers shall OH
serve the following ORDER: They shall
compile, first. the statements from all
the polls or votiug-places at which there
shall have been fair and peaCcablc reg
istration aud election. Whenever from
any poll or voting place there shall BE-
received the statement OF any supervisor
or registration or commissioner of cleo
ton. in the form as required by'section &c
OF this act, an affidavit Of three or more
citizens. of any riot, tuinult. acts OF vio-
lencc, intimidation, armed disturbance.
bribery or corrupt influences, which pre-
vented or tended to prevent fair. free
and peaceablc vote of all the qualified
electors entitled TO vote at such polls or
voting place. such returning officers
shall not canvass. count or compile the
statements from such poll or voting place
until the statements from all other polls
canyassed and compiled. The re-
turning officers shall then pro-
coed 10 investigate the statements
of riot. tumult, acts ofyiolencc. intimida-
ton, armed disturbances, bribery of cor
rllpt influences, at any such poll or vOt-
ing place; aad il, from the evidence of
such statement. they shall be convinced
that such riot, tumult, acts Of violence,
intimidation. armed disturbance. bribery.
or corrupt influences, did not materially
interfere with the purity and freedom of
the election at stiCIr poll or voting place.
or did not prevent sufficient number OF
qualified voters thercat from registering
or voting 10 materially change the result
of the election. then and not otherwise
said returning officers shall canvass and
compile the vote OF such poll or voting
place. with those previously compiled.
But il the said returning officers shall not
be fully satisfied thereof. it shall be their
duty to examine further testimony in
gard thereto; and to this end they sh.i
have power to send tor persons and pl-
pers. II after such examination the re-
turning officers shah be convinced that
said riot. tumuit. acts OF violence, intini-
dalton, armed disturbance, bribery or
corrupt influences did materially inter
ferc with the purity and freedom of the
election at such poll or voting place, or
did prevent sufficient number of quail
fled electors thcreat from registering and
voting to materially change the result OF
the election. then the said returning off
GERS shall not canvass or compile the
statement OF the votes of such poll or
voting place. but shall exclude them
from their returns provided, that any
person interested in said election by rea-
nt hgi "a 70 at4t Il,
be allowed hearing before the said re-
turning officers upon making application
within the time allowed for the forward
ing of the returns OF said election.
Hence if there are any facts requiring
the judgement of the board upon the va
ldity of any election or return as affected
by such frauds or violence, it would be n
interference with state rights
and local scli-goyernmcnt. Tor persons
like ourselves, without official rights, TO
attempt to induce or control its judicial
action. Had corresponding board in
the state OF New York in lsGS been auth
orized TO pass upon the fraudulent re-
turns Of the votes of the city OF New
y ork that year. and a delegation of cili-
zens Of Louisiana, however respectable,
10 influence its judicial action
upon the facts presented 10 il under the
laws OF that state. such attempt would
have been universally condemned. II
the duties of the canyassing board of
Louisiana were merely ministerial or
clerical. as in the case of any officer
charged by law with the duty of certify
Ing aud declaring the result Of any elec-
ton, and investigation, with no discrc-
ton, as when the president Of the senate
counts and declares the votes OF the cleo
tors OF the several states IN the election OF
president and yice-prcsident under the
of the United States. differ
ent case would represented. II is ia our
Judgment vital 10 the preservation Of
liberty that the habit OF
obedience to the forms Of law should he
seduloustv inculcated and cultivated. and
that the resort to extra constitutional
modes of redress, for even actual griev-
ances, should be avoided and condemned
as revolutionary, disorganzing, ana
tending TO disorder and anarchy.
TO reduce the whole question, there
fore. to the mere clerical duty of count
ing the votes actually cast, as proposed
by you, in distinction from the votes le-
gally cast and returned, irrcs pectiye OF
the question whether they are frauGu-
lently or violently cast or otherwise Vi
tiated, involves notification of the laws
OF Louisiana, which have already been
adjudicated as valid By the supreme
court, and would be wholly unjustiiiable
here as well as in any other state OF the
Union, which had provided laws to pro-
tect the rights of voters aud the purity OF
the ballot. We can not, therefore, concur
in your proposition for a conference on
that basis. Very respectfully,
John Sherman, of Ohio,
Stanley Matthews, of Ohio,
j. y. Garfield OF Ohio,
VIM. d. Kelley, OF Pennsylvania,
John \. kasson, of Iowa,
f. w. Stoughton, of New \ ork,
c. Irving Ditty, OF Maryland,
!. IL. Nanallen, of New York,
Eugene Hale, of Maine,
NJ. 5. Quay, of Pennsylvania,
WIN Cumbach, Of Indiana,
Ed. +. Noyes, of Ohio,
job +. Stevenson, OF Ohio,