The Portland daily press., 1877-02-07

davIts he prepared in the Vernon Parish case?
Answer did uot advise the preparation of
any forged affidavits whatever.
OtLer questions were propounded but with a
like unsatisfactory result.
BY MIR. Field-YOu have stated that YOU
never altered return or destroyed paper
Al decline to answer the question.
witness deellned any question concerning
him his liberty and relieved him of his disa-
bility. He wanted to know whether he was
the peer OF any member of the committee or
vassal.
The Chairman1That has nothing to do with
your position. You are under obligation to
answer every question, excepting of course,
such as might tend to crimnate you.
witness reserve to myself the construc-
ton OF my rights, and the committee have no
power to force me to answer questions whilst T
am under sentence of the House.
Mr. Field-You rejected 10000 votes and
were they rejected for any cause other than al
legged intimidation?
Witness-I decline to answer.
Odd you not know the rejection of 10000
votes was part Of the conspiracy to give the
electoral vote to the party not entitled to il?
Al leave that for youself to answer.
Q-Ddd you take part in any such con-
A-Does that conclude your question?
The Chairman-Oh, answer the question or
not.
Mr.. Tucker-We will take a vote to see if
such conduct on the part of witness should be
tolerated In the committee.
Chairman-Ths question is whether the COM
mlttee will require the witness to answer
Mr.. Tucker-The sentence Of reprobation
should be put on witness for not answering.
Wltness-Then am vassal.
Chairman-Keep ORDER sir.
Mr.. Seeley remarked that it was unanimously
decided this morning so far as the authority
knew, that witness should answer questions
Messrs; Lawrence and Burchard concurred
with Seelye.
Mr.. Field to chairman-Is it not case of
contempt and misdemeanor under the laws of
the District of Columbia for witness to refuse
to answer questions propounded by commit
tee?
Chairman-It is.
Witness-You cannot deter me-
Chairman-You will be accommodated.
Witness am willing to be accommodated.
Field-The witness is .contumacious in the
highest degree.
showing that the number of votes rejected i'm
the several parishes attested by Charles Abel.
Secretary of the Returning Board.
Objection was made to the paper.
Question being taken objection was overruled
by strict party vote.
Statement showed that the board rejected
1,763 Kellogg and 10,2S0 McEnery electoral
votes
Another paper was exhibited to Witness also
attested by Abel, showing that the supervisors
OF registration returned 6,717 Kellogg and 3d.
515 McEnery electoral votes also the certificates
of the Returning Board certifying to the cleo
ton OF the Kellogg electors and that they re-
ceved 70, l55 votes. and that the McEnery cleo
tors received 70,50S votes.
Lawrence asked witness whether if the re-
turn from Vernon parish, as carried with the
tabulated statement, was different from the
original returns, If it was done with his knowl-
edge or appreciation.
Witness replied it was not nor had he knowl.
edge it was done with the appreciation of any
other member OF the board, and he also denied
the truth OF Littlefield's statement that he d.
rected the returns to be altered so to elect Hun
ter and Anderson judge aud district attorney.
They were his personal but not his political
friends.
Mr.. Field Intercepted witness about the pa
pers the former had exhibited. but witness de-
cined to answer.
Q-Because you are under duress are Won nm.
willing to tell the truth?
Wltness-I am never unwilling to tell the
truth.
Q-Why do you lot an swer?
WitDeSs-When the contempt is removed
will answer, but not till then.
Q-You were asked just now whether you
threw out votes for reasons which were found
ed on evidence satisfactory to yourself Will
you answer that?
A-That embraces the whole question, and
Care you not willing to testify whether
your board threw out 10, 900 and odd votes hon
estly or dishonesty?
Al am willing when relieved from contempt
of the House.
Q-Are you now willing to anwswer the cues
ton whether IN throwing out 10000 and odd
votes your board acted honestly or dishonesty?
ave acted in conformity with the law.
Gin throwing out votes?
| Ave threw out for fraud, intimidation and
violence at the polls.
Q-Were any thrown out because of irregu-
larlties?
Al think Grant parish was excluded.
Q-Any except that?
Al think not.
Q-Was there single objection to the votes
on the ground that they were not actually cast?
A-None
Q-Then they must have been thrown out on
the ground of intimidation?
Amen were forced to vote contrary to their
wishes.
Q-Had you any witnesses before your board
TO prove that any particular voters were induc-
ed to vote contrary to their wishes?
Alt was impossible to have oral testimony
Inc board adopted rule that testimony should
be taken by both parties.
Q-Dd voters themselves testify that they
voted under compulsion? Was such evidence
furnished to you?
Al think So
CIVIL you say that proof was presented to
you that hundred different voters had voted
unoer compulslon contrary to their Judgment?
Al don Know how many. think there
was evidence of the fact. There may be 100, or
QUO, or more who said they were forced to vote
contrary to their wishes.
In further examination witness said no votes
were rejected except in consequence of intmi-
datlon, and among other things Field called
the attention of the witness to the fact that IL
appeared in the parish of Concordia that in.
sephs, one OF the Republican electors. received
1901 votes, while in the certificate of the Re-
turning Beard he was credited with $3.50 votes.
Witness replied it was in the evidence that a
n vaI . hall
the commissioners of election, who made up
the returns from their count and sent them in.
Field asked witness whether he did not say
before Morrison's committee that this happened
in Madison.
Witness repled-And something of the kind
in ConcOrdia,
Field called the attention of the witness 10
the fact that while the board by throwing ont
lo,Oo0'Votes cast Tor the Tildsn electors gave
the electoral votes for Hayes, the witness omit.
ted to account for their act Of thus giving the
latter 5000 or 1000 majority
Ia response to questions by Lawrence witness
said the board gave to the Hayes ticket only
such votes as it was entitled to receive. that
ry to law.
More Evidence of LittIefeId's Periury.
Judge Davis testified he was chief clerk in
the eftice OF the late returning board; knew
Llttleteld; did not see him talking with Wells
OF making any erasures; first heard of apy
changes IN the returns when he read it in lhe
papers; Investigated the papers and saw that
various returns had been changed; couldn't
find original; Lttlefeld said first it was gone.
then lost and afterwards destroyed; reported
the tact to Abel, clerk; he was ordered to !
complete the papers in the Office; witness furn-
ished all the data for required copy that he |
could find in the office; Littleteld said thew |
agreed with the original; Littefeld made a |
copy which was filed with the returns Little. |
heid did not give any notice of his going away;
learned from Wood ward that he had received a |
telegram from his father up North to the effect |
that he was dying. Generally LittIefeld tailed |
OIL figures to be copied and if he SO desired he |
could falsify returns; there was no opportunity |
TOR revising the work; change of votes in polls |
and would affect no candidate and the ma |
pers purportng to be commissioners state
ments were not regarded as authentic as thew |
were received by the Secretary of State from
strangers; in data furnished hy witness didn,4