Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-07-27
SHERMAN,s sTATEluENy.

AS was to be expected, the examination of
Sherman and Garfield by the Potter COM
nittee at Atlantic City developed little that
was new. Both protested their innocence of
any attempt to influence the action of the
Louisiana returning board, and the first
named individual persisted in his assertions
that the Republicans of the State had been
shamefully bulldozed by the Democrats
through their rifle clubs. A significant ad-
mission is made by him, however, in his
letter to Mr.. Hayes. He states that, by the
omission of the names of the electors on the
tickets voted in two of the parishes, the Re-
publicans lost large number of votes,
which he places at from 1,193-the Republic
can estimate-to 1000, the Democratic esti-
mate. He admits that the law is conclusive
that these defective ballots should be thrown
out, and therefore that at least three of the
Iilden electors would have a majority.
It is perhaps useless to call attention to
the presumption of Sherman, stranger to
Louisiana, who spent but few days in the
chief city of the State, in claiming the ex-
istence of frauds and intimidation in direct
contradiction of the testimony of scores of
unbiased men with large acquaintance in
the State and a wide personal knowledge
of what occurred both previous to and dur
ing the election. He sets up his opinion,
based on reports authenticated only by the
testimony of lot of vagrant nobodies,
against the united testimony of the
most reputable men in the State of
Louisiana, and has the impudence to de-
mand that he rather than they should be be-
lieved. The testimony upon which he bases
his opinion would not be accepted in any
court of law in a case where the value of q
yellow dog was al stake. And yet he asks
that it be believed in case where the des-
tiny of a whole nation hangs in the balance.
His claim is absolutely preposterous.
The interrogatories relative to appoint
ments to Office touched Sherman on tender
spot, and he declined to answer, referring
the committee to the records at Washington
for information on that point. He unhesi-
tatingly avowed, however, that he would, if
left to himself, reward those who stood bv
the party in the times that tried mems souls.
He refused to assert, however, that the hone
of reward influenced supervisors of elections
to commit perjury, and made no distinction
between the duty of the administration to
such and to men who were honest in their
convictions. A careful dissection of the evil
dence on this branch of the subject discloses
| a rather loose state of morality on the score
tary's part. ge
His emphatic denial of the existence of
the Anderson Weber guarantee was fully ex-
pected. He pursues the plan laid down by
Mrs. jerks in her testimony, denying all ex
cept casual relations with the two men. IA
it has been already proved that the original
of the letter has been DESTROYED, Mr..
Sherman feels safe i'll assuming this stand.
But it will remain question which
every man must decide. for himself whether
his word is more worthy of credence than
the positive testimony of score Of equally
reputable men who saw the guarantee and
identified the handwriting as that of John
Sherman. person accused of crime can
not be compelled to criminate himself, and
how far Sherman has availed himself of this
privilege of evasion or denial must be left to
the disinterested reader to decide in the light
OF the testimony heretofore adduced, and
that which may hereafter come. But one
factor must not be overlooked: The per-
sistence with which witnesses, supposed to