New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1877-01-31
THE VERNON PARISH RETURNS
Littlefield Disproves His Own Testi-
mOny.

The Democratic press agent and observ-
ant specials in Washington are making en-.
tirely too much of j. F. Littlefelds testi-
timony in relation to the Vernon parish
returns-are OVERRIDING the thing in fact.
The press dispatches this morning, for
instance, contain the following which pur-
ports to be part of Littlefeld's testimony
before the congressional committee:
Witness was requested by Governor
Wells to transpose the returns of two polls,
taking votes from the Democrats and Civ
ing them to the Republicans-polls two and
nine. The number of votes thus trans
ferred were l7S. The original figures were
erased, and those required written in their
place.
Question-Whst motive did Governor
Wells assign for requiring you to make this
change3
Answer-To elect Hunter Judge, An
dreWs district attorney, and KelsO State
Senator The parish was in the district
where Governor Wells resides.
Unfortunately for the oredibility of Mr.
Littlefeld's statement, the returns of the
board, even after they had been surrep
tltiously manipulated by the witness him
self, give the lie to his assertion. The trans
position of 17S votes was not necessary in
order to elect Hunter, judge and Andrews
district attorney. The rejection of the two
polls ordered by the board affected that re-
suit, and left Hunter a majority of 1913,
without any traRsposition of votes, such as
Littlefeld afterward, for his own purposes,
seems to have perpetrated.
Certainly no such transposition could
have been ordered with view to elect
KelsO to the State Senate, for by the of
ficially promulgated returns of the board
Mr.. Texsda (Democrat) was returned
elected by a majority of l33 votes over
Kelso, in spite of the l78 votes wrOngfully
transferred to KelsO's account. The trans
position did not affect the congressional
election, for Smiths majority in the district
was 1894 over Elan democrat
The improper transpositiOn of these votes
in fact affected no result State, district
senatorial or congressional. 1t appears to
have been done by the witness who testihes
to it, and who subsequently purlOined the
original return containing the evidence OF
his guilt, for no other purpose than to cast
odium on the returns and enable him to
make trade with a Democratic detective,
The following figures show the facts;
For Congress, the vote OF the district Sc
promulgated was, for Elan, Democrat, 1914;
for Smith, Republican, l0,S6S. The vote oi
| Vernon was 6i9 for Elan, and for Smith
For State Senator, the vote OF the district
as promulgated was for Texads, Democrat
2022; for Kelso, Republican, 1899, For State
Senator, as stated by supervisor, 2l87 fol
| Texada, and I724 for KelsO.
For district Judge, the vote of the district
as promulgated. was for Blaokman, Demo
erat, 1855; for L. A. Hunter, Republican
2ll5. For district Judge, as stated by the
supervisor, was 2005 for Blackman and 1865
| for Hunter.
For district attorney the vote of the dis
| trict as promulgated, was for E. G. Hunter
Democrat, 1889; for Andrews, Republican
| 2084. For district attorney, as stated by
the supervisor, was 2070 for Hunter, and
1909 for Andrews.
1t was oarelessness on the part of the
Returning Board not to notice the changes
their clerk had made in the returns of thi:
parish without their authority before they
signed the returns, but nothing worse.
The records of the Secretary of States
office contain these suggestive items:
w. X, Spearing, appointed hay inspector
March 6, 1874; removed May 8, 1873.
j. F, Littledeld appointed hay inspector
March 6, 1874, removed September o, 1879