New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-02-13
BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL.
SKETCH OF THE LOUISIANA CAsE-THE COUNSEL
THE SESSION YESTERDAY.
IRY rKLEeRAPH THE TRIBuEE.l

THE SESSION YESTERDAY
fBY rBLESRAPH TO THE rRIBUrEl
WASHINGTON. Feb 1.-THE Electoral Commission
assembled Immediately after the adjournment OF the
Joint Convention. AL the members were In their
places The lawyers tables were occupied by Messrs.
Evarts Matthews, and Shellabarger of the counsel
for the Republicans and by Messrs. Field, Trumbu1'
Merrick, and Green Of the Democratic counsel
Almost the only spectators were Mr. Bancroft the
historian Senator Howe. and ex-COngressinan
Farnsworth. Nothing was done except TO vote an
adjournment until tomorrow morning AZ IL. nj.
Edmunds objected to this but all the Democrats and
with them Dir. Hoar and Judge Bradley voted Tor
the notion 1t is probable that the course of pro-
ceeding ordered in the Florida case will be followed
Tomorrow and that the directors will be allowed
four hours to present the arguments for ana against
the conflicting returns. There are so many Demo-
cratic directors that if they all desire to speak some
thing like a process of defamation Will have 10 De
adopted II will be observed that In the list OF oD-
jections signed by David Dudley Field and hy
Others an attempt is made to bring into the case the
vast mass of testimony taken by the House Louis
lana Committee and the Committee on Powers ana
Privileges This same effort made in the Florida
case and met with total failure but Mr. Field Is not
a man who is easily discouraged
II is not likely that the Commission viii reach
the earliest The speeches of the directors will con-
sumo the whole of day. Then the Democratic
counsel will develop their line of attack Its chief
feature will be an assault upon the consttutionaty
of the Returning Board and the legality of its pro-
ceedings The counsel will want to introduce docu-
mentary evidence TO prove, first that the board had
no authority to the vote for electors: and
second. assuming that the board had authority,
that il did not make the canvass IN the manner re-
0uired by law. The admssibility Of such evidence
will be disputed by the Republicans, and there Will
thus arise an introductory question upon which the
Commission Will probably hear arguments enough
to consume full day. 1t is not easy 10 see how the
Commission can admit evidence of this sort or OF
any sort without departing from It's own rule laid
down in the Florida case. In that case it decided:
That il is not competent under the Constitution and
the law az it existed at the date OF the passag 81 a
act to 90 evidence dinde the papers opened by TIC
President OF the senate III the presence oi the TWO
honss TO prove that other persons than those regularly
certified by the Governor OF the state Oh floFluh III
ber monument nv tie Board of state CauyasseTs VI
SAID state prior he time required for the performance
Of their duties had been appointed electors, OF p co
ter proof TO show thai they had not
This ruling would seem 10 have been made in adj
vance to cover the case of Louisiana. In the Flor
ida returns reference was made to the action OF
the Board of Canvassers, while the Hayes returns
from Louisiana are explicitly based upon the de-
cision of the Returning Board. The Democrats
saw, however, that as they did not challenge the
legality Of the Florida board the Commission did
not PREJUDICE the question raised y their attack
upon the validity of the Louisiana board and can
without inconsistency hear evidence as to the legal
iy of its existence and operations. At all events
they mean to make an effort to have the door
opened enough TO go behind the returns as lar as 10
scrutinize the board.
Y t1,o do in
out from all chance Of winning the case for there is
nothing in the McEnery returns 10 stand upon.
Indeed il is believed that they will not even insist
that those returns ought to he counted regular
and valid. There il not on their face anything APP
preaching the show Of legal formality which the
Florida rejected returns had. There is no State
court decision or legislative action TO back them up.
They are merely papers and pretended certificates
made out by wholly unauthorized persons.
What the Democrats will strive for it is understood
is the rejection of the Kellogg returns without the
acceptance of those of McEnery. If the question of
evidence is decided against them as in all prOba-
bily is will be, the Democratic counsel VIII have TO
resort TO hopeless attack upon the legality of the
Kellogg government Ex-senator Carpenter Is
relied upon for the heavy work at this june
ture. He is said TO have prepared himself
with great care, and as he will have the benefit
of his previous thorough examination of the
recent political history of Louisiana he
may be expected to make a brilliant effort. Ex-
Senator Trumbuu will also speak for the Democrats.
On the Republican side, Stanley Matthews and
Z. ". Stoughton will make the principal arguments.
AS III the Florida case the decision the Louisiana
controversy will doubt turn upon the question Of
admitting evidence, and thus the preliminary strug-
gle will IN reality be the main Republicans are
confident that the Commission will not depart from
the plain letter of its rulings and they there
fore regard the as virtually settled in advance