The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-03-28

| Democrats OF the State ought to be satisfied
with the decision Of the Supreme Court. II
| we cannot check election abuses, let us per-
petuate and utilize them.
| tCatahoula News.l
Anderson is free. The verdict of the Jury
has been set aside and the penitentiary has
been, cheated Of it's victim, The decision of
the Supreme Court in the matter has taken
thought that the Judgment of the lower court
would be affirmed and that the only hope of
the prisoner WAS executive cemency The
ground OF the decision Of the Supreme Court
was that the record offered in evidence In
the lower court did not conform with that
contained in the information; the paper Of
fered In evidence is not the paper charged
as being forged; In order to be forged the
instrument which, it is alleged is falsified
fraud. No where In the law is q
consolidated return required as a declara-
tion OF the result, and iss alteration or rnodi-
| fication can In no way affect the election; It
is the essence OF this crime that it bs COM
document which would change the re-
suit OF the election. This was not done Though
the verdict Of the jury was set aside on purely
technical ground, we are bound to think that
their Judgment was In strict conformity with
the law, and 1t is in accordance with the law
| that the courts are bound to decide, irrespect-
i've OF personal or political considerations
There are doubtless those who believe that
| tlo WISIltS VI blie uOVeFUOF, ana tne pressure
exerted by the national administration, had
their influence with the court. but we have
too great o respect for the gentlemen who
compose that body to suppose that they
would be thus induced to disregard the law
| II patriotism or the interest OF Cancellation
had anything to do In reversing the iury's
verdict, all that we have to say Is that court
which could be influenced by such motives as
these to violate their oaths by rendering de-
cisiOn unwarranted by law, ought to be inn
/ yne6:ltnIV rpnnUpl a hnt ry,,,11l 1r4k
grace the walls OF Baton Rouge that the seats
OF the Supreme Bench.
| tMarksvile Bulletin]
| The Supreme Court has finally passed on
this cause cetetre of Anderson, and the deci
sion has been in every way favorable to the
the application for q rehearing now pending
meets with more favorable reception than
ordinarily attends applications Of the kind
The grounds upon which the decision turns
are two. 10 our mind the last ground is the
least assailable. The first Is. that the forgery
charged is that Of a paper purporting to be
| ''the consolidated statement of votes of the
parish OF Vernon whereas to constitute the
oilense charged, the forging should have been
Of f the Original returns" The court say,
dence OF the result OF the election, and the
| alteration OF them is not the alteration of such
| paper as will support the accusation.
The second ground, and in our view the
uIoSt ttutDle lS tiltL tueFe - no AIIegArl0n or
avernent in the information that the utter
ing and publishing were made by the accused
In public capacity and under color of his
office. While it may be possible to hinge an
argument on the question whether the Statute
has clothed the 'consolidated returns" with
the efficacy and authority necessary to sup
port the charge II is clear that there could
be no forgery Of the returns except by pub
Jig officer whose special function4it was to
prepare them.
1t will thus be seen that Anderson escapes
the clutches OF the law on purely technical
plea. Perhaps it is well that it is So Ger
tainly we would not have had the court to
render contrary decision with its impress
he may be, he was entitled to all the safe
guards which the law threw around him. We
are glad that these have been extended to
him in q merciful spirit. And we trust that
serve as an example and deterrent to others
who come after him, If it does this, his trial
will have served a useful purpose.
JSt. Mary Enterprise1
The indictment filed against T. G. Ander-
son, in the Superior Criminal Court in New
Orleans, for publishing forged public record
and on the strength of which he was convicted
by Jury OF his countrymen, and sentenced
by the judge Of said court to two years i'm
prisonment, was ,quashed, set aside, and the
prisoner released by judgment of the Su-
preme Court of this State rendered on the
eighteenth instant. This judgment is res ju-
dicnta, not only as far as Anderson Is con
cerned, but it throws an insuperable bulwafk
OF protection and impunity around the other
members OF that Infamous institution known |
and forever damned in history, as the Louis |
lana Returning Board; for the court went to |
the, bottom of the matter, and not only set |
aside the verdict Of the jury in Anderson's |
case, but rendered definitive judgment to |
the positive effect, that the consolidated state
ment OF the supervisor OF registration of
vernon parish was not public record, and |
not only that, it was not such written docu-
ment, as being wrongfully altered, would re-
suit in that injury which would give 1t the
nature OF the crime of forgery.
After examining the law bearing upon this
matter more carefully, we conclude, with re-
luctance, however, that the decision Of the |
court is correct, Yet the correctness of the
decision, according to the technical require
derson's sin against the peace, the rights and
liberties Of the people of this State. In every
patriots heart to-day burn deep-seated regret
and disappointment because of his escape
viii or forgving spirit OF the people it was
not the justice OF his case that saved hint
was single technicality of that law, which he
himself had so often set at defiance. If the
people could have. spoken, their utterance
would have been that of the jury which con-
victed him guilty The people do not stop
70 consider the forms of law; they look at the
'esults OF a mans wrong-doing and Judge him
accordingly, Neither will they accept the de-
lsIon OF the Supreme Court, because they can
lot understand it. When the court say that the
alteration OF that document was not neces-
5arly iniurious-they look at the injury it en-
allied, and conclude at once that the court is
5rylDg toshield Anderson. They cannot see
through the nicely OF the technical reasoning
When the court say that he did not publish a
'orged public record, because the consolidated
statement Of the supervisor Of Vernon parish
vas not such, and for the further reason that