Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-06-13
CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE.

CONTRIBUTORS EVIDENCE.
The testimony of Ex-Congressman O. B.
Darrell, of Louisiana, before the electoral
Investigating committee on Tuesday, is of
the utmost Importance and should be closely
scanned. While it does not develop anv
new iniquity in the conduct of affairs in
Louisiana, save the bargaining for the col
lectorship of New Orleans, it is, in every
essential part, even down to the minutest
details, strongly corroborative of the truth
of Anderson's testimony, and while of itself
it would be of little importance, it is of the
utmost value in sustaining the damaging
facts developed in the examination of the
first witness.
The first significant fact that will strike
the reader is the anxiety of all the applicants
for Office in Louisiana to procure the assist
ance OF Anderson in urging their claims.
Packard was the first to avail himself of
that assistance, and it is noticeable that i'm
mediately after Anderson's first interview
with Senator Matthew's in his behalf, the
opposition of the Senator to Packard, which
had been pronounced and active, van
ished into thin air, and from an
open, uncompromising enemy, Matthews
was transformed as if by magic into an earn
est, active friend and advocate. William
son, who disdained Anderson's assistance
was cast aside as of no account, and his
chances for preferment treated with the ut
most Indifference.
After it had become evident that Packard
was 80 obnoxious to the people of New
Orleans that his appointment was utterly
lmpracticable, Mr.. Darrell fastened to pro-
cure the support of Anderson in his own be-
bali. This aid was promptly given, in an
swer to solicitations, both in the form of
personal interviews with Senator Matthews
and by means of correspondence. One let
ter particularly, written by Darrell to An
derson, is significant as showing the anxiety
of Matthews to liquidate the claims of An
derson upon the administration. Darrell
writes under date of February II, 1878:
Packard said to-day he would support me in
case he cannot get it himself If you think
best, you write to me that in thinking the
matter over since you have gone home YOU are
more convinced that am the best man. and
that 1t qDi2 suit you best. He Matthew'S
7'a"ts to 10 eohat is right by you, and he tells
zyeed., Il strong but careful letter acilz help.
need hardly say that if I should bv any
means get the place, will appreciate you, and
II don't will all the same appreciate your
efforts.
The inquiry will very naturally arise:
Why, if Anderson was in reality the politi-
cal adventurer the Republicans now claim
him to be, his influence was so eagerly
sought by aspirants for office of all
grades, and why that influence
was so potent with the powers that be up to
very recent date? It appears conclusively
by MI. Darrells testimony that Anderson
had claims on the Republican party as he
represented, and that while he did not de-
sire office for himself, he was anxious to serve
his friends. His influence did not appear to
lose it's potency until it became rumored
that he was negotiating for surrender of
the letters in his possession to the Demo-
Gratis. Then he was dropped like hot po-
tato, and his character for veracitv was de-
cried far and wide.
1t is very evident, from the facts devel-
oped in Mr.. Darrells examination, that An
derson was in possession of documentary
evidence that would seriously compromise
Matthews, Sherman and Hayes, and that the
of1ice-seekers of Louisiana knew the nature
of that evidence and used it as a lever bv
which they could extort favors from the adj
mlnistration. The existence of the Sherman
letter, too, is manifestly proved, for not only
had MIR. Darrell seen the letter himself, but
Mrs. jerks had acknowledged to him its
possession. The fact, also, that she changed
front Immediately after an interview with
Sherman, is presumptive of the truth of the
charge heretofore made, that she had sold
the original letter to that official.
Taken altogether the evidence of Mr.. OAR
rell is of the utmost consequence. 1t dissi-
pates whatever doubt of Anderson's truth
fulness may have existed, and adds i'm
portant documents to the already overwhelm-
ing mass compromising the honesty of the
chosen friends and associates of the Presi-
dent. 1t is just such evidence as would be
regarded in court of law as conclusive OF
guilt, and it will have its due weight in the
public mind when the verdict shall be made
up against the fraudulent President and his
corrupt advisers.