New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1877-02-21

side has specially discussed lt, and 1t "a the
proposition that these function OF the Re
turning Board are Judicial in their nature;
that they can not, under the co Institution OF
Louisiana, be conferred, and hence this law
goes by the board for that reason. Let me,
In the hrst place. give you a ref Tence in
the case Of the State VS.. Fluffy [tdeventh
annual report which was decided IN 1856.
l quote that in order to get you away back
of these unheslthy influences that ara al.
legged to have pervaded this case since the
rebellion. In all these cases which give
you the question of the validity of this Law
giving power to the Returning Board is in
volved, although, perhaps, in no ore
OF them, certainly not in all Of
them, was the question directly and
expressly made. But it was involved, and
IN each one of these cases it was decided
that It is valid law, and that the quasi
judicial powers that are conferred upon the
Returning Board are entirely competent to
be conferred by the constitution of Louis.
lana. Counsel also referred to Cooley's
Constitutional Limitations 10. 623) in verih.
cation of what he had claimed, holding
that, according to this authority, in every
one of these cases there were special statJl-
tory tribunals, and, in most of them, they
were not the courts. 1 corae now to the
real question in this case, and really the
only question there is, and that one is de-
cided Dy what yOu have Just decided in the
case of Florida, and that is, whether or not
it is competent for you to go behind the ac
ton of the Returning Board of Louisiana
for the purpose of finding out what hap
pened in its exercise of the jurisdiction be-
slowed by statute. will not restate what
has been decided In Florida. want
to say that any intimation that when we
deny the power of going behind the finding
OF sthe board we are thereby covering up
frauds or seeking to escape something, is, l
aWu hDnI to-, II n L
even the semblanee of fairness in it. Why9
was surprised with my. friend Stoughton at
the loud denunciation in which our friend
on the other side INDUCED yesterday. l
say the language was not worthy of my
friend. 1t is not surely worthy of this tri-
bunal. Why do say thRtg First of all,
because it is beginning the whole question
to say that you have a right to try the
questions of fact that Disclose this
fraud in this tribunal 1t is an insult
to your intelligence to say that because as
mere counters and mere ministerial officers,
because you can not go into frauds that,
| therefore, it is an attempt to cover up
fraud. Why look at it a moment in another
| light. This first argument of the gentle
men contains in itself a true felO de Sc.
How lOud-mOuthed was their declaration
when they were talking about frauds in the
/ Returning Board What was that fraud
1t was fraud committed by them being
mere ministerial officers, a fraud committed
in usurping jurisdiction and going behind
the returns from the precincts and counties
and undertaking to throw out votes in VIC
lstion Of law. There was a case where
| fraud could not be inquired into according
| to your law. Stand up to it now and take
it's consequence. 1t is right, and it is right
| lust because of what you put into your re-
| port in 1872, to wit: that the two houses
| combined have not the powers of a quo
lUdTra2tO court. YOu can not go behind the
/ returns therefore. You can not talk to me
about our position being one designed either
| by logic, law, or merit to shut out frauds. 1t
| ill-becomes our friend to talk to us about
| this being an attempt to put man into the
| presidency of the United States by fraud.
Then, in another case we find these gentle
men coming and saying, ooh! Mr.. Kellogg
is the Governor of Louisiana, and therefore
| he is no electOr; and then the next moment
you have them coming forward and say.
ing, "Ohi he is TO officer at all; he is not the
| Governor of Louisiana, but McEnery is.'
To such strange positions gentlemen most
eminent are driven, in this frantic endeavoI
to trample down or to escape from the ia
miliar requirements of law.
Mr.. Abbott would like to ask ques
ton. What do you make of the provision
that any person interested in the opposi
ton by reason of being a candidate, shall
ton within the time allowed for forwarding
the returns of said electiOnG Can the essen
tial right of persons interested in an office
to be hoard before the Returning Board be
pre- served if you regard this-if you regard
this as merely directory and essential
Mr.. Shellabarger-I answer that, first by
saying that this suggestion, addressed tt
the consideration of evidence, that it is
useful provision beyond all doubt. 1t is
| tn ha
mere question or suggestion, going to thu
convenience, it ia not OF essence. Because
this is a political process; because it is
step in government as distinguished from {
trial of private rights Of citizens in courts
because it is that, therefore, in every sucf
case you will find the law directory. Lool
at the reason of the thing. Is it possible
that you are going to hold with that sam
violence that rendered it impossible t.
vote, and at the same time rendered it in
possible for officers safely to make thei
affidavits in their returns that they can no
do at another time9 Beware before yO
come to such conclusion. If you do il
you will have to do it in the face of the Law
now conclude this argument by an ALT
. sion to what has been the weight and bal
den on the other side. 1t ia in regard t
, this alleged outrage in the State of Louis
! ana; Why, gentlemen, can you shut you
eyes to what is now, If not the saddest, ee
tainly one of the saddest chapters in Amer
: can history9 By actual count, through tn
: aid of General Sheridan, it is now set dow
i as q part of your history that In chi
5 blighted and blasted State of LOuisian
: four Thousand and odd citizens have bee
murdered-murderedb by plan, murdered b
: system, by organization; murdered for th
Q purpose of putting down the right of th
black man to vote, and that thing has bee
Q going on and on through these dark an
. terrible years. 1t was my misfortune, gel
tlemen, to go once myself, in 1866, to tn
9 State, sent by the Congress of the Unite
b States, and l took the testimony of hui
j. dreds of men, and when l was taking it
/ literally sat with my feet in pools of h
Q man blood, shed in putting out the trt
,, government of the State of Louisiana, an
they did put it out-oh, right well and G
u fectually. Gentlemen of America, "
. have written Ill the last fifteen years
9 grand history for your country in
d general aspects John Bright, of En-
n land, once said to me: "Sir, i hay
been part of the British government no
s. for thirty years. In that time we have co
Is Quoted great affairs, We have extend'
e the right of Engishmen to vote; we ha'
10 abolished the rotten borough system; '
10 have emaneipRted the jews; we have 81
Is waited our colonies; we have extended &
d right of the children to be educated;" al
ot so he went on in grand catalogue, al
:; concluded by saying: "Sir, notwithstan
Q, ing what l have said about my country,
TO say to you that you have dwarfed," a
n he brought his hand down on the table wi
At startling emphasis, ''you have dwarfed
that we have done in the life of the Britt
IN nation by what you have enacted in
" last ten years of your life. You have saw
a. the lite Of the last, the one republic of
he earth, and you have put out Of your cons
tuition, and thereby ultimately out of I
Is earth, the chAttelization of the hum
4, | NUaa mot trihnfa9