The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1878-03-23
duty OF deciding that election returns may
be falsified with impunity.


becoming the means. OF committing fraud,
| and that therefore their alteration In any way
whatever cannot be construed into criminal
offense: This not only effects the release OF
against any further prosecutions Of the
Returning Board. The decision has the
remarkable merit of pleasing both sides. 1t
enables the Attorney General and his party to
gality Of the returns on which Hayes was
elected; and 1t prevents the immediate pos
sibility OF o split In the Democratic ranks by
relieving Nichols OF the necessity of inter
ferinng with the execution OF the programme
Of tho .unreconeled members of his party.
Republicans will have their conviction of the
iniquty of the whole proceedings against the
Returning Board deepened by q decision
which shows they were as destitute of war
rant in law rs in equity. Louisiana ought
now to haye-what it greatly needs-a period
OF political repoee.
New York etarl
The intelligence that the Supreme Court Of
Louisiana has reversed the verdict of the jury
in the case OF Thomas g. Anderson, of Re-
turning Board fame, on the ground that the
Vernon parish returns were not susceptible
Of forgery, will be received with regret and
astonlshment Until we have further in
formation than this meagre outline of the
grounds upon which the Judgment of the
indulge In any criticisms OF the result. At
the same time 1t seems an extraordinary pro-
ct"eding for any court Of law to overthrow
the verdict Of jury as t, question of fact,
dict was contrary to the weight Of evidence
The case was so clear Of all doubts as to the
guilt OF the accused; the testimony proved
so positively that the returns had been
sided at the trial so fully presented all the
points Of law bearing upon the. ques-
lions raised, that this action of the APP
pellate court seemed never to have
Il It
sition that an election return, the integrity of
which is guarded by the most emphatic statu-
tory provisions Is not susceptible of forgery
is a paradox that, at this distance, appears
the legal merits of the case may be, the dis
hearteping fact remains that junta of per-
jured scoundrels may deliberately falsfy the
vote OF IN American State and defy. the out
ragged community to punish them for their
crime.
New York Herald
The decision Of the Supreme Court of
Louisiana yesterday, in the case OF Anderson
the convicted member OF the, Returning
Board, will bring Joy to, several prominent
who protested so yehemently against his
conviction, and to Gov. Nicholas who was
under an implied pledge to pardon him il
the Supreme Court should affirm the iudg-
gone conclusion that Anderson was to be set
free, either by an executive pardon Or o
judicial decision, nobody should be sorry
that his release came IN the latter form Had
the Supreme Court sustained Anderson's con-
yiction the pardon which was to have fol-
lowed would have caused q great public scan
dad. 1t would have looked too much as If
Coy. Nichols had bound himself by o
political bargain to interfere with the admin
lstration of criminal justice. Anderson hay
dcial proceedings. not only Gov. Nichols
escapes an unpleasant dilemma, but the ap- |
psarance is avoided Of the obstruction of JUS
tice In State by Federal dictation or pres
at large in any event we are glad that it has
been done by regular judicial action and hot
by an extorted exercise of the pardoning
power in fultilment of an unseemly political
bargain. The Legislature of Louisiana,
which had been assembled in extra session
merely to give effect toAa possible pardon,
Immediately adjourned yesterday on the an
nouncement of the decision of the Supreme
Court. -; It may be safely assumed that this
j. Madison Wells wifi rejoice even more
heartily than Gov. Nichols and Secretary
Sherman: The country Is to be congratu-
lated that 1t is to hear no more of the ever
lasting Louisiana middle.
Washington Post.l
The decision of the Supreme Court OF LOU
Islam in the Anderson case seems to have
gone beyond even the petition Of the defen-
dants counsel In Its sweeping reversal Of the |
Judgment OF the court below. The most that
seems to have been expected by .Anderson's
counsel and friends was the ordering of |
new trial, either on the grounds Of defect In |
the jury panel or the discovery OF new evil
dence for the defense or both. But accord
Ing to our Geographic advces, the Supreme
Court went behind both the technical points
raised by the counsel for the defense and the
to attack the subject matter Of the indictment.
itself. AS we understand it the Supreme
Court OF Louisiana holds that Mr.. Andefson's |
offense was not indictable under the statute;
Is not legally presentable by grand or tria-
bic by a petit jury ia any form under the ex-
listing statutes OF Louisiana. This, we are
informed, puts an end to the Returning Board
Of Louisiana have no remedy against those
who may have conspired in the past or may
plot In the future to annul or reverse their |
expressed will at the polls. OF course we
cannot speak positively upon these points
Supreme Court. But our information by tele-
graph points conclusiveiy in the direction we |
have Indicated. Thus we remark that the |
doctrine held by the Supreme Court seems to |
solutely revolutionary. The notion that for
gerry ceases to be an indictable offense when
ever it is committed upon election returns
backed up by the ruling that the documents
proven to have been forged by Anderson and
within the purview Of the law, is doctrine that
will be likely to arouse curiosity in other
States as to what Louisiana law is, anyhow,
and, II 50, how much, or words to that effect |
But be this as it may, the Supreme Court of
Louisiana has taken John Sherman's fight
into its own hands and the country at large
may consistently take the view that at last
the interminable infamies of that State have
been taken out Of the National arena and
bottled up within her own local limits. This
OF itself is q relief and neither the country
nor the National Democracy will take any
more interest in the wrongs of State whose
people seem to have either no law suscepti-
BILE of being construed for the protection OF
their franchises as freemen or no courts brave
of impotent threats from powerless Federal
Administration. 1t may be that more com
plete information will tend to modify these
hasty conclusions, but at present there seems
to be no alternative to them.