New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-06-13
,,-0TPsONs STORY.

-
ga'ln~ n r. Darra this morning at haupas' IL DO
gressu"- s in regard 10 Anderson. He said I'D re-
nA' Do.,,ors tbst Anderson had told him tua' t"o
Ply ,,rotests ne had made about the election
returns 800 and true. He then gave the following
evidence: ,.... ..,o ,bap the time mentioned
The ssu,v letters when 1 had the conversation with
n one " srrobaby two three weeks AFTER that =
nralSon came over and saw nm ana ne t1e NE ng
Anesg MT Matthews and had oid MN or tnrea,e9 3
bad ss me publication Of these documents ana the
would bring i9f1n ~, SnG o ~ Nh M Mat
tnevs uu wa that " he chose 20 take that view OF
he mstter neDS1flv at an interview with Mr. Mat
peareu dev or two afterward, Nh Matthews spoke OF
thew, 90 matter, and said he would have nothing
the eaue a. ,rifb Anderson and let him 60 ahead and
fniii,sgb anything he had lie would nave nothng
riheI 20 of me 70 can your attention TO the socaed
ll.,,ent and to ask did you ever that agree
% wat P19D Sey before o or after e nSueuf f
trlerson was here as an appiiehI LOT some foreign
appouH' ti,scs The Louisiana delegation prepared a
beye.. Seeommondat0n for Anderson for the appoint
written shortly after the 4th Of March called with
meni Anderson the President and presented the
Nase sHS recommendations and some letters Anderson
WflleE ~, friends IN Ohio, and stated the
bad ION nhv Mr. Anderson should be appointed
Iea had performed faithful service 10 the party and
lhai ne 80 and acted as intelligent man. The mat
ga ~ aiong for one or two weeks. Mr. Anderson
s.s,ssIei 70 get impatient About week or two after
fplt,.5 IN the President. Mr. Anderson came 70
We Ca sad he aud Nash had had quarrel that Nash
.not doing much as ne cOuia ioi niln an0 ne was
going 10 sA Nm thought Nash was doing the best he
sngd A day or two after that interview ne seemedio
pe n' seonid ruin HIM. He then presented the Nash
Agreement 20 me Tread 9t et av gu ,e ia aue
AsAeeii 40 see such document sigued by gentleman
supils,o ,eror of Congress at the time. called his
VIZ ~ me fact shat lt made after his protest
a sSrs and asked him II II was mace after the
soms az Ri sald il Was He said ho afraid Nash
profess S,n and he had Threatened him. II he did not
bis aereement, that ne would revoke his protest,
sgn he sraed it, think. far securing pOsiuon
ADO % - IA concerned i took part ! asked him
ssf be meant by signing such tOhk ahO Nash sau II
as foolish and he ought TO have known betIer OF some
tesfc was anything connected with the history
f{5si document which Influenced Won to doubt as TO
49, az Audersons statement that subject,
eon may slate whatit vast Anderson sara TO me-
n saoang of this document mat n was signed ny MT
sisscsn ana Mr. st0ughton, In New-Orleans After
ra when the document was exhibited 10 me, ur When
49, ri mai ID was entirely different from what Mr..
Anderson bad always told me-
INTIMIDATION N FELICIANA.
o-rp ubat connection did Anderson make any state
en 10 YOU about the general condition OF his parish
Ale represented 10 as perfectly terrible and mat no
Republican was safe there moment. He was not and
,oo,e else was That was probably three weeks
ar a month before the election. lie menuonsa the
name of roininent Republicans who were either mlven
e m me narsh or inimdated 10 such an extent that
i6ey would not dare e. make speeches OF even vote
Thst parish bad formerly been IN my Congressional dis
sset I'M Tie elections Of 1865, 1870 aud ls72 was
very intimately acquainted there had mace a can
va Of the parish aud knew all the leading Republicans
en- Ind always carried IL by very large majority and
oh course when he told me these things ana e1
bibtcd the evidence q violence on DIS Own
person took a very great Interest; 81, -, ,,srs,,e
80 ,.ss,,,iafion there We're the party lines so
"a Az nj Won could regard party men as what we call
reliable party men, OF mei3 Ss M Vas there he
1870 "a fu s12that Dr., TIE same leaders OF the beuD
senfieufs on course. good many had been killed In
1875 aud 1876. say the ieadlng heIuDeahs WHO hau
eompleelV intmidatod. as Mr. Anderson informed me-
and as other parties old, tnat they could not make
az j = a.
Soat at The same time aid Anderson ana they on had
TIE story, that no man dared shy ne Wa hS 1
eourse / was IN tie Parish myself during the year
Are Won sufficiently ,duanted with Mr.. Ander-
sos reueral reputation I'm Louisiana 90 state what is
ANow, Of ny Own persona aSoTiSo5e wo1 NV o o
@ si1afed aad think his reputation was not what
Won can good al least IN a Northern community. II
Ilgbf he called fair in The CITY Of New-Orleans
suy ,bsf himself 5aS talked with his Itmate friends
fbers and think II called upon 20 testify they would
Ssgs s reputation there not considered good at all
Nr WcNshon-Was Il the Nash agreement that first
opeped your eyes 10 Mr.. Andersons unwortbiness OF
me Witpess-Up TO that tlme had heard things Of
Anderson mat were detrimental 20 MIN, but knew 80
s5s tS S n to me Of nch kind Of document
IS the Nash agreement was was something eXtfaor
0.-Eycn from louisiana A.-Even from Louisiana.
C-Dd you then 60 TO the President ana revoke your
zecOmmend iuOni A-NO, ST. tuhh very bnOIIl aiteI
that probably few days, left the city, did not see
w Sse admiIied signing that agreement did he not
and told bad story about Anders9Df Al don't think
be said 20 much about Aneefsoh t sa1 j s dn
enc of lie two would not like TO say mere between
yibt and no VAS wrong Mr. AndersOn's statement 20
me was that he made his aud return In good
naf tte care OF him as be Thought be ought TO- and
Therefore be exacted this document from Nash.
DARRALLs EFFORTS FOR Al OFFICE.
O You have stated that couple Of weeks or ten days
Ur~ae osyar hara ft1
threatening stanley Matthews with the exposure Of this
6ocumepfq A-That was his statement 70 me, and Mr..
Matthews corroboratedit
O-Is that letter IN your handwriting (handng let
Ter 70 witnessli Ayes, sir.
Mr. Mcmahon here offered the letter IN evidence and
read himself rs follows;
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,,
WAsmE0TOS. ID. C., April ~, 1875
Ny DEAR SIR: IL seems 70 look quite sure here that
presd hmself most decidedly for me, he get
klasef Tonight he and Marks go 70 see Matthews
can't eet ID himself think n NJ would press the mat
irnow i would be sure and would % Done next week.
Mite 70 him 4 You think best ana II you are not com
hE j. H. sypher IS here's rs against Packard, ana
iappose ne is coming over 70 your place tomorrow'
'''''' 'p''i Truly NV" Yours, ETC., oB. DAnRALL
JANIS r. ANDERSON, esq, PhiiGdeiphta, fe'0t''
Q-How did you come TO write such letter to Ander-
tn uretn him 10 write letter 20 Matthews after Mat
svs and Anderson had Quarreed. ana be had advised
ysuobave nothing TO do with iti Al understood,
Giel Ma interview with Mr.. Matthew'S, that ne ha1
written Mr. Matthews and had received letters
nphin and Matthews appeared 70 be as well disposed
ase ever.
Q-Was that after the quarrel Ayes, sir. He bad
Written 10 Mr. Matthews, and Mr. Matthews appeared 10
y ~ vel disposed toward him as ever
8-YOu say tue dispatch 20 bring the
papers over dated 10Th April. 1873, was
.lapy that you had curiosity 70 see Tue
latr Do You still say tnatf A.-Ihat 10 strictly true
hhas mad no conversation with eny one IN regard
ne papeFs, neither with Matthews nor any one else
~ az no ones suggestion, and ~ far as reeo
~ z was simply matter OF curiosity, simply 10 see inc
ne witness was then examined closely with reference
sending on for the allie ged Sherman document and
ofher naners ga ,,hr ba xVapfed 70 ace them The