The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1876-12-14
WASHINGTON. D. c. Dec.

cancy in the board was never filled, and
the reason of this was the miserable pre-.
text that the board could not agree upon
man. Not one of 5000 men in Louis.
lana who voted for Tilden could be nam
ed. The very thing on its face showed a
determined purpose to do wrong. Had
there been Democrat on the board he
would have seen what was done in Sc.
cret. All the whitewashing in the world
could not wipe out or hide this guilt
The majority in this Senate might make
efforts to forestall public opinion by dis
tlibuting this testimony, but it would 90 to
the country stamped with the stigma OF
being one side statement He protest
ed against printing the dispositions in the
name of fair play, He hoped they
would be allowed to lay upon the table
until the other side should be heard from
and then print all.
Mr.. Morton said the Senate had the
singular spectacle here of Remuneration
Of the Returning Board of Louisiana for
fraud, while at the same time resistance
was made to laying before the country
the evidence upon which the action oi
that board was based. The Democratic
committee in New Orleans was invited
by the Republican committee to put in
the testimony taken by it, together with
that taken by the Republicans, but the
Democrats were not willing to make pub
lie their case as it was before the board.
They wanted to wait to get more testi.
mony and thus have case which was
not before the board. They thus con
fessed that they were not satisfied with
their case, but wanted to make a new
one, This free denunciation of the Re-
turning Board was unfair If the board
acted unfairly, let the Democrats bring
forward their evidence to that effect He
was not afraid of the testimony; the more
the better ."...
Mr.. Thurman said he did not know
why the Democratic committee in New
Orleans declined to furninh their testi-
mony to the Republican committee but
had he been a member of the Democrat
ic committee, he would have refused to
furnish tesumoney, and he thought the
committee acted faiily in refusing to
furnish the Republicans with their testi,
mony His colleague Sherman and com
rades went to New Orleans at the request
of the President, They did not ask the
Democratic committee to join them in
making report to the President, but
ask that the Democratic testimony be
placed in their hands, that they 1--we Re
publicans) might make up verdict and
send it to the President Who constitu.
ted the Senator from Ohio Sherman
and his four associates in New Orleans
the sole judges in this case? There
never was time in all the history of
this nation when the form of government
and Constitution were put to more Sc
we're test than now, and everything done
by Congress should set an example to
the people Of GOODNESS.
Mr.. Morton said all the ingenuity that
could be brought to bear on the other
side could not change the dilema in
which the Democrats were placed.
When the Republican committee in New
Orleans offered to lay the whole testi
mony of both sides before the country,
the Democrats declined to furnish their
side, and when the Republicans came
forward to publish what they had, they
were asked by the Democrats not to do
so. ...I r.4 4.r"n.. ...... ... .
Mr.. Sherman defended the action of
the committee with which he acted, and
said the committee presented every
particle of testimony they could get.
They tried to get it all on both sides, but
could not do so. He argued that it was
on the testimony now before the Senate
that the decision of the Returning Board
was made. u F.. r.......
MI, Thurman said it was upon one
side Of the case that the Returning Board
rendered its decision and reversed a
popular majority of 1000. Where was
he statute which authorized the commit.
zee which visited New Orleans to report
o the President The members of that
we're not public officers. If
hey were, the President invited none
out members of his own party to serve
IN the committee. The attempt to put
garments of office on this thing would
lot do. - XIX. ,,. ...l....
Mr.. Edmunds said the third section of !
he second article of the Constitution of
he United Stated empowered the Presi-
lent to transmit to Congress from time |
o time information as to the state of the
Union He was commanded to perform |
hat duty and bound to obey il. The
to obtain information in regard |
o one Of the States Of the United States,
invited certain citizens to 60 there to get
uch information. and after he had OBJ.
aimed. it, he communicated it to Con-
.ress, as he believed it was OF a charac-
er which justified him in transmitting it
0 Congress. He argued that it had new
r, in the history of the Government
een usual to refuse to print information
ent in by the President, i H".N
Mr.. Bayard said it was usual to print
ocuments sent to the Senate by the
but these papers were not of.
cial, and did not pretend to be Official.
hey were not accompanied by any rec
Of the President calling
,r the action of Congress. The office
President of the United States no
lore connected him with the election in
ny State than the office of Senator con.
ected him with such election. There
IRE, the whole action of the Presidentin