The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1877-01-20
MIR. HEREFORD ON rAE L0UIsI.
ANA RETURNING BOARD.

Mr.. Hereford.
Mr.. Hereford-Mr. Speaker, now ur-
der discussion is, as understand 1t, when
properly confined, within very narrow
limits, and for the purpose OF showing
the precise scope of this question send
tothe Clerks desk and l ask to have
read the resolution now pending before
the Hou=e.
The Clerk read as follows.
Besoloed, That the Speaker of the
House issue warrant under his hand
and the seal of the House of Represents
tives, directing the Sergeant-st arms of
this House., either by himself or his
special deputy, to arrest and bring to the
bar of the House without delay j. Mad.
ison Wells, Thomas Z. Anderson, q.
Cassanave and Lewis Nj. Kenner, to an
swer tor contempt OF the authority OF
this House and breach Of the privilege
in refusing to produce to the special COM
mittee of which-Eon VIM. r Morrieon
Is chairman, now sitting in New Orleans,
certain papers, IN obedience to eubgy"ua
duccS tecum which was duly served upon
them, and to be dealt with as the law
under the facts may require.
Mr.. Hereford-The question then be.
fore the House is whether these parties
should be brought before the bar OF this
House to show cause why they should
not be punished for a contempt of this
House OF Representatives,; contempt in
doing or neglecting to do-what? There
is the whole point and the whole object
of this resolution. They are to be brought
here to answer tor their contempt In re-
fusing to produce before our committee
sitting ~ New Orleans, of which
William r. Morrison is chairman, GER
tain documents; not to be taken out OF
the State, as the gentleman from Massa-
chusetts Mr.. Hosr has said. This House
has never yet ordered those papers to be
brought from that State. But that COM
mittee, q part and parcel of this
House, clothed with all the powers of
the House so far as this proceeding is
concerned, have demanded by subpoena
duces tecun that these parties should ap
pear before them and bring certain doc
uments-returns, ballots, dispositions and
sffidavits that were before them; in
other words, bring before the committee
the vote of the people of Louisiana.
This they refused to do. Those papers
are within a stones throw Of where that
committee was sitting. Yet those men
refuse to produce those papers; they even
rcluse to allow an inspection OF them.
Why, sir, wherever the common law
prevails the right of the people to inspect
public records has never been denied I'M
til to-day. l read from Greenleaf on Ev.
idence, volume l, section All:
First, IN regard to the inspection OF
public documents, it has been admitted
from very early period that the inspec-
ton and exemplifcation of the records
of the kings courts is the common right
of the subject.
Yet to-day we are told by the gentle
men on the opposite side of the House
that a record of set-constituted Re-
turning Board shall not be seen by an
American citlzenl Has it come to this?
Where is the authority that any of the
gentlemen on the other side have yet
produced going to show that we have
not right to inspect those records? No
LAWYER cal rise ia his seat on this floor
and say that if court of competent
jurisdiction was in session in the city OF
New Orleans, and that court needed
certain public records for the elucida-
ten of any question before that court,
it would have not have the right, and 1t
would not be its duty to issue subpoena
duces tecnm to bring any and all such
records into that court. ANY other de-
la r,nnHnyv cheat a
fraud. No lawyer standing IN his place
upon this floor can deny that legal pro-
position.
The only question then is, has the
House of Representatives jurisdiction
over the subject matter2 That this
| House has decided, that the. Senate has
decided, that the house of Representa-
tives and Senate both and singly have
the right to inquire into the subject mat
ter. Having that right, they have all
the incidental powers to accomplish that
investigation.
But gentlemen on their side are all at
once great defenders Of State sovereignty.
WHY is it, ask, at every stage of this
investigation and every other investiga-
ton. we are met with obstacles, objec-
tions and doubts2 All, we have seeH
for wears past that governors can be de.
throned. No question, no objection, no
protest then comes from the other side.
Legs latures can be invaded, disbanded
bv midnight order of drunken judge,
and yet no protest comes from the other
side.
= state it as proposition, Mr.. Speaker,
that no gentleman will deny-I have not
time to 90 over all the facts-that this
Returning Board has no legal existence
whatever. Itwas brought into existence
and ne, petusted BY the bayonet; by the
same power that disbanded the Legisls-
ture of Louisiana
Well does it become us, imperative is
it upon us that we should investigate any
returns made BY such man as j. Madison
Wells. hold in my hand the report OF
the committee of which Mr.. George F.
Hoar was chairman and of which Mr..
Foster, of Ohio, and Mr.. William
Walter Phelps were members; and
IN that report on page 3, this
anne man Wells, the President OF
the Board, it is stated made
an affidavit than intimidation had exist
ed at certain polls in certain parish,
but at the same time it is also stated in
that same report that the same man, j.
Madison Wells, who swore to intimida.
ton in that parish, was not in the parish
on the day of election and swore to facts
of which he could have had no personal
knowledge. That affidavit was found
among those returns when the commit
tee made the parties bring them before
IL That affidavit false "a il WAS false