The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-02-11
THE LOUISIANA CASE.
And Few Words also About The Florida
Business.
Summers that Democratic Counsel WIN
bring Forth to Defend Louisiana,
tCor. N. Y. tterald.1

Judge Matthews and others before the Electoral
Commission, not on the governors certificate and
not ON The majority OF votes, but on the return
made by the State Returning Board, The cleo
tors, said Judge Matthews, are eho en- by the
people. voting at their precincts; he vots IL con-
sotdated by county Gffisers and their oonsoda-
lions are then reported by them again TO a third
aud highest aud last returning Office "a or can
vassiug board, who receiving these returns from
al tho counties III the State. exercise the powers
conferred upon them by law, and make that
winch in my judgment is the completion sud The
oonsnmmatisn n OF The appointment Of ths electors,
Even II an investigation ma d. sfter these electors
have acted should show that they wore not the
choice OF the majority of the voters o the State,
they would still be the pro per electors, Judge
Matthews held, aud even If the electors thus ap-
pointed by tho returning bo srd, exercising tho
powers conferred on it by law, should have
The g0verr or's certificate. they would still be the
proper electors.
Thls statement, which il the strongest and
most precise yet mste by the Republic "a side, IA
intended TO cover Oregon well as Florida. Tt
IL probably Intended to cover Louisiana as we'll
as the other two, and there is q general impress
sion 1t may carry Florida for the Republicans be-
fore he commission, for II il aCkuuwl dyed to bs
in many respects tenable position.
The Democrats will try to show the Florida
Returning Board acted in violation of law, but
they may not succeed to the satisfaction OF the
commission, and Tho argument that s ate author
tiles have no control he electors after they
have acted, and that, in fact, tho 9th Of Deoern-
Der. the day on which they meet, concludes tho
Whole proposition go far as State inter-
ference Is concerned. is thought TO be
inclusive. Hence there his be1 eager
discussion about tho Bearings Of these prop0sI-
tons on the Louistaha case, which will follow that
Of Florida. II ths commission should on these
grounds give Florida to The Republicans, or
TO speak more accurately, decide that certif jate
NO. l ia the true and valid certificate, how would
this affect Louisiana Those Democrats who
have most closely studied The Louisiana case
assert confidently ii the commission shall accept
the propositions laid down by Judge Matthews as
fundamental and correct, 1t must, on those
grounds, either throw out Lousianas vote or
give the State to the Democrats. The case Ia
put in this way: The Republicans hold that the
decsion of the Returning Board, ''exercising the
powers conferred upon 1t by law" is final and In
the ''completi7n II and consunmation Of the ap-
p intment OF the electors. They could not hold
less than this, it ia said; toey could not assert
that the decisions f the Returoing Board in
violation OF the Law creating il ctud bs effica-
ciou5. But Democratic counsel will bring for
ward proofs when Louisiana comes before the
Commission intended TO establish the following
points:
|. That by the statutes OF Louisiana the Wells
Returning Board had no authority or power TO
canvass the vote for presidential electors, but
that The Canvasslng Board charged by the State
law with this duty consists of the Governor sec-
rotary OF state, Attorney General and dstrics
judge, or any two of them with the Governor;
that, therefore, the whole action Of the Wells
BoaTd 30 far as 1t relates to presidential electors.
was usurpstion Of power and without authority
oflaw.
2. That even II the Returning Board had had
the authority to CANVASS the vote for electors this
must be done under the general law erestng IL
and detii ing and Inning its powers, and that ID
violated this In In many ways, and thus made
It's action and decision Of no force or value.
.. That the law requires that the Returning
Board shall consist OF five persons taken from oil
political parties, whereas the Wells Board con-
AF hat
absolutely and repeatedly refused to choose q
fifth, D 1moerat, as tho law required them TO do.
4. That the law creating the board. and from
which alone II derives any power or authority,
expressly declares shat all protests for intm1-
dstion other irregularities at the Ills must be
made within twenty-four hours, iu certain pre-
scribed forms, and rlust acco o.npany the county
returns. Unless so made, the vote is not TO be
counted; but it will be shown that In many and
perhaps most cases the protests did not 30 ae-
company the returns and were not made within
he twenty.fonr hours, but often days aftorward
In New Orleans.
5. That the law requires tho board to canvass
and compile the statements OF tho Cun miss on~
ers Of Elections, and that the board, Ia violation
of the law, declared themse ves bound by the re-
turns Of the Supervisors OF Registration, differ
mt set OF officers.
6. II will be shown that In only one case in the
whole State did the Commissioners Of Election
or the Supervisors OF Registration send up TO tho
Returning Board protest or statement alleging
intimidation in the form, within the time and in
tho manner reduited by law In this single case
IN which intimidation was charged In the proper
rim ami time, Republican officials, IL will bs
shown, alleged Republican intimidation, but the
board, instead OF stituting inquiry, simply
counted The protested returns for the Republican
patty.
7. II will be shown, and, in fsct, has been
shown 10 speech by Gen. Gibson, that the
vote cast In Louisiana last November was larger
in proportion to the voting population, and
aFv in tn pi at tgat IN
IN Northern States that while Illinois cast 100
votes to every 127 males 0vrr twenty-one, Maine
cast 100 to Every t2) males over twenty one, and
New York cast 100 votes TO every 1i8 ma es over
twenty-oge years. the returns show Louisiana,
with bad roads and distaDt polling places, cass
100 votes to every 1lg males over twenty-oue
years, and that while the vote or democratic
Now Orleans was but slightly Increased over
I87d, the vote OF the country parishes where
intimidation was alleged WAS increased over
400 IN two years.
g. twiIl be shown that in several CASES the
Hetdrnlpg Bo@Td pABsed O. paris II return at the
public sitting as regular and correct, but later,
in their secret ses5on, threw cut the Democratic
majWltlGs; that precincts in considerable Eurn-
GERS were thrown olt thus Dtcrslly, where the
people at their homes wetg utterly igHOt9nt OF
ny charges 5gaiGst them, where no protests
had b0tn filed and where tie local kapubhcan
| can 5ltafes (as Gen. Gti son has shOwn), thus
counted 10, absolutely refused to accepl the Of
ness To whica they frankly said they knew
they w-re not chost that IN one crse,
where the Republican local poll iicians were send
| ing repota OF II riot and calling for troops, the
United States army officer on the -po in charge OF
troops, reported to his superior officers that the
place was Us quiet az New England town; that
| in another case the Supervisor OF Election In
parish, who had been manager Of q snake show
In New Orleans, had removed to Mississippi, and
was actually member OF the Legislature Of that
| s ate while acting as Supervisor Of Election In
Louisiana and thai ne arbitrarily threw out five
| p ecincts in the p4rish without cause, and thus
threw out 1147 Democ. atle and lat Republican
| yOtes. g.. <4 <s
In short, an attempt will be made to show that
ground on which Judge Matthews demands
Judgment for his side In Florida, Lou sana must
be gwen to the Democrats, or at the Worst ita
yote must be excluded.