The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1878-06-14
POTTER ) PLUMMET.
SOUNDING THE DEPTHS OF THE
LOUISIANA FRAUD.
Darral on the stand.

WASHINGTON, June l2.-The' Potter y
ycstigation committee resumed its 81 Ing
to-day, Mr., Morrison presiding.
Darra', of Louisiana. was exam ned by
Mr. Cox. He stated that he first saw An
derson in the spr lg Of 1877, when he said
the protest he had made was correct as re-
CARDS intimidation. Shortly after my con-
versa,ion with Potter, \ lderson told me
that he had seen Matthews and threatened
him " III public documents and pictured
to Matthews the scandal it would raise, and
in reply Matthew'S told him if he was in
clined TO p, sue that course he might
get anything he dc> red. Subsequently,
Matthews said to witness he would have
nothing further to do til Anderson he
intended to publish the documents. The
witness said he had seen the orig al Nash
agreement, and related the circumstances.
Anderson was in Washington about the 4th
of March looking for an appointment, and
called on ne at various times. Shortly ar
ter March 4, | called on the president and
stated thGt the reasons why ! 'derson
should be appointed were because Of the
active part taken by him 4 the Louisiana
election, AMI that he was very telligcnt
man.
About week after our visit to the Pres
ident Anderson called on the witness and
said he ant Nash had Quarreled, and that
he was going to expose Nash; other
words, he vas going for him, He stated
that he had papers that would ruin Nash.
Thcreuron he produced the Nash agree
mcnt. N,sh, later, explained to the W t
ness that ie had signed it IN foo sh
moment, md ought not to have done so,
but carednothing about it; witness never
had conversation with Sherman about the
so-called Sherman letter, and believes there
is no such document in existence. His
knowledge is only what he had heard from
Mrs. jerks and Anderson, whose stories
were contradictory.
The witness said \ Ndcrson had stat Il to
him that the document was signed by Sher-
man anC Stoughton, but the copy the witness
saw wa.,igacdhy Sherman'only, and entirely
different from what Anderson represented.
Andersen had stated tn the witness that his
parish vas Terrible and no Republican
was safe there, and mentioned the names of
prominent Republicans who were intim-
idated and unable tn vote. The V 'tless
said Anderson. when at home, was much
dissipated although his reputation might
be considered bad in the Nor-h, it was con-
sidcred good 10 fair in New Orleans.
Mcmahon latter reading the Nash agree
mcnt-Did You revoke your application
for the appointment Of Anderson! A
No. sir; never wrote to the President re-
vok.ng the recommendation had made
in fact, was quite sure there was no
chance for his appointment.
Q.-Why was Anderson regarded by you
- important person to have y Your deal
ings with the Administration, and why
your correspondence with him to brig
him over here 70 aid in receiving the sup
port Of Matthews A.-Andcrson repre-
sented that he had claim, on Matthews
which he was sure would gain his support,
and he lAndcrson) decided to assist :
friends. having Il good position himself
Q-llow came you to writ, to Anderson,
urging him to write to Matthews in your
behalf regarding the New Orleans Collcc-
tor>hip, even after the quarrc! between An.
dcrson and Matthews had occurred! A.
Well, knew that Matthews was well DIS.
posed towards Anderson, even after the
conversation between them, in which An
dcrson threatened the publication Of the
documents, and that he had received letters
from Anderson after tina, time
Butter What did you advise Anderson
to do in regard to these papers A,-ShoW-
ly after the committee was appointed, re-
c'iy2d n lcttcrt'rcm Anderson saying that he
intended tcstify'lg something on that &c.