Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-08-23
THE DICK ER.
INTO By HAYES IND
BURKE.
Conclusion of Major Burke's Testimony
Before the Potter Committee-Some Fur
ther Explanations of the Transactions at
the Wormley OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES and
Delano as Dip1omats--W. Z. Howe
Called to the Stand.

DeAduo az DlplOmatS-.W n. howe
Called to the Stand.
| New YORK, Aug. 22.-Major Burke continued
his testimony before the Potter committee to-
day. He said that the of 1875 for New
Orleans was fraudulent and in the interest of
the Republican party by increasing the negro
vote 25. 900 and that the State was carried for
Nichols by 5000 majority and for Iilden by
about 5000.
The witness said: Universal pains were taken
| by Democrats to prevent intimidation of vot-
ers. ALI came in on the Republican side.
| @. What was the course of the board in re-
gard to ex parte afhdavits? A. They first de-
cided not to receive any such, but afterwards
changed their opinion and received ex parte
| affdavits from the Republican side of the
House, and then again, when Democratic atfi-
| davits were sent in they changed their ruling
and refused to receive them. IL was after the
I'D OF November before we had an opportunity
/ to receive protests. When we handed in
/ bundle of ex parte afidavits the board refused
/ to receive them and said the witnesses should
: be present. There large number OF Wit
nesses. The board examined a few of them.
This put the Democrats to great trouble, COM
ing the distance of some of the parishes.
| The total vote of the State of Louisiana in
I
| registered voting population
| He saw Anderson on Sunday morning in
restaurant. Witness was in company with Mr..
| Guthrie. and at the other side of therestaurant
Sherman and Stoughton were sitting. Witness
| spoke to Anderson for a moment but did not
see Anderson speaking to Sherman or Slough
| ton. Anderson told witness he had signed
something in the nature of protest, but was
under the influence of liquor when he signed
it and could prove that. Anderson told that
in consideration for what he had done for the
Republican party they had promised him the
| naval Office. He had interview with Ander-
son about the 10Th of November
He stated to witness that he in
possession of documentary evidence and other
evidence that would prove conspiracy by the
Republican party to throw out the five bull
dozed parishes of East Feliclana, Washetaw,
| Northouse, Riceland and East Baton Rouge.
| He further said he could us the parish
of East Feliciana. but that he was poor, and
| if he did so, would probably be thrown into
| prison on trumpet up charges. He agreed toif
we paid him $4,000 then and $1,000 after the
count was declared. His proposition was con-
sidered and accepted, as we did not think there
was any more wrong in procuring evidence to
show Republican frauds and rascality. The
proposition would have been accepted but for
| the fact that we had no money.
! Mr.. Stenger took the witness in hand: He
had interview with many other Republicans
| regarding Louisiana matters besides those in
| the Wormley conference
| @. Name them. A. Well, among them
were Wadleigh, Howe, Frye, Cameron, West
| and several others.
municated to Gov Nichols that there was a
| determination to exact two Republican United
| States senators from the Nichols Legs lature
in consideration for the yielding up of the
| State. This was what chiefly brought him to
| Washington. 1t was learned that the leading
To ha adj strait
| power had come to the conclusion that the
| bayonet rule could not be maintained in Loui-
| siana, and they were willing to abandon Pack
| ard if they could strengthen their
waning power in the United States
| Senate. These facts were communicated to
! witness. On his arrival in Washington he had
an interview with the secretary of war, Cam
| eron, on Louisiana matters and to how the
| Nichols government might be allowed to
| maintain itself. That interview took place
about the 9th or 9th of February, 1877. It was
| at a private house. Mr. Cameron appeared to
be impressed with conviction that the
| Nichols government should prevail, as he APP
| peared to be fully aware of the condition of
things there. The difficulties on the way were
| touched upon such as decreasing the power Of
Senate, and that they would, as party ques-
ton, oppose any action in Louisiana that would
| lessen their power in the Senate.
| The difficulties presented in case the vote of
| the State declared for Hayes We're also dis
cussed, and witness assured Mr.. Cameron he
could present a legal theory on which the
Nichols government could be sustained even
| if the electoral count was given to HAYES: that
! the returning board had no power to count the
vote for governor or ieutenant-gover The
| Democrats had already a majority in both
| houses.
Here Gen. Butler appeared and took his
seat. Witness was to have prepared memorial
| setting forth the law under which he claimed
| they could act. He telegraphed this matter to
Gov. Nichols. The memorial was to be drawn
setting forth all the law and facts, and to be
| addressed to the President, Senate and House
of Representatives, in view of Citing bill
! passed taking the power from the returning
/ board of counting the vote for
| governor and acknowledgement Nichols
by his replies did not seem to fully understand
| the proposition about the memorial, while wit
ness understood from Secretary Cameron that
| two Republican United States Senators would
be exacted from Louisiana provided the Mich
| oils government was recognized. Yet there
| was no special pledge made and the matter was
deferred and Columbus Delano went to Column
bus, o., in reference to the matter. Witness
/ believed Mr.. Sherman was acting with Mr.
| Cameron in the matter of the United States
| Scholarships. Representative Gibson had told
him so. In a conversation with Sherman on
the 26th of February, the difficulties of recog-
nizing the Nichols government We're dis
Sherman was opposed to the election of two
Democratic United States Senators. Witness
suggested that could be overcome by postpon-
ing the election until after the recognition of
the President and formation of the cabinet.
q. Then after all this. was Cameron against
you? A. Once when he went to the telegraph
office with Gov. Penn and stopped the order
issued by President Grant withdrawing troops,
and said: He was secretary of war, and would
be damned if he would let the order co.
THAT he was secretary of war, and the order
should have gone through him.
Witness, continuing, said he did not believe
that any time after the 10th of January Grant
believed the Packard government should be
sustained. He believed Gen. Grants policy
favorable to the Nichols government began
on the 9th of January, when he refused Kel-
logg's request for more troops, and decided to
recognize either government. On and after the
10Th of January he evinced desire to recog-
| nize the Nicholl's government
Question by Mr. Hiscock. Then all your ne
gotiations with persons in Washington were
simply with a view of getting Hayes govern
ment not to interfere with the Nichols gov
eminent, as it had been already legally estab-
| hshed? A. They were with that object I
think Mr.. Hayes made up his mind before
these conferences how he would act toward
Louisiana. | believe that Sherman, Garfield
and other leading Republicans in both houses
were influenced by the considerations proposed
at the Wormley conference
| q. What did Gen. Garfield ever say that in
duced you to believe that of him? a. On the
9th of December appeared a report of the Presi-
dent signed by Sherman and Garfield, stating
that the election in Louisiana had been carried
by bloodshed, riot and intimidation, and sus-
tanning the returning board decisions.
4 y. Now, concerning The fact that Packard
was defeated by bulldozers, etc., did that JUS
tify them in arguing that the government in
full possession should be subverted?
/ Gen. Butler objected and a long wrangle en-
sued between him and Hiscock.