Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1878-06-06
THE INVESTIGATION
Progressing, with Anderson Still on the
Stand-General Butler Looking up
tie Documents on that Statement
by Witness duplicating STAN
ley Mathews.
What George e. GOrham Knows About
Certain Important Papers-Anderson
CrOss-Examined- Mr.. Stanley
Mathews Makes Emphatic
Denial OF AndersOn's
Statements.

WASHINGTON, June 5.-The house COM
mittee of investigation of alleged frauds in
Louisiana and Florida in connection with the
last Presidential election met to day. The
returns of the electoral college of Louisiana
having been received from the secretary OF
the senate, were submitted for examination.
After the returns were read several members
OF the committee expressed a desire to be IN
the house to vote on the Wood tariff bill, and
recess was taken.
The committee having reassembled, Gen.
eral Butler offered the following resolution:
WHEREAS, James E. Anderson swears
that between May % and June l, 1877, Hon.
Stanley Mathews told him: 81 have just to-
day had letter from the President in regard
to your case, and have written him such a
letter as will secure your appointment to some
position" and that on or about June I'd the
President said to witness that he had received
a letter from Stanley Mathews requesting
him to give him the place; therefore
ResOlUed, That the President be requested
to furnish to the committee all the original
letters above mentioned which he has re-
ceived, If any, or certified copies thereof,
with copies of any such letter supposed to be
written by him, as he may prefer, in order to
secure an intelligent cross-eXamination of the
witness on the subject matter thereof.
The resolution was adopted.
George G.. Gorham, secretary of the
senate, was sworn and questioned by the
chairman relative to the papers submitted to
the committee, and he stated that they were
papers relating to the Louisiana electoral col
lege of 1876; he knew nothing of
any record of the proceedings
of the returning-board until yesterday,
when he was informed by a correspondent
that such document was In the keeping of
the sergeant at-arms of the senate, and that
gentleman would give the committee any in
rdI n
James Il. Anderson
was recalled and further cross-examined by
Mr.. Reed.
A copy of the agreement between Ander-
son and Weber, which Anderson stated in
his testimony Saturday that he had mailed to
Stanley Mathews, was produced by Mr.. Cox,
a member of the committee, who had pro-
cured it from Mathews. 1t correspondent in
every particular with the copy already IN EVIL
dence, but Anderson, on a critical examIna-
ton of 1T, declared that it was not the copy
which he mailed to Mathews, although
the writing of the body of the paper and of
signatures was an excellent counterfeit pre-
sentment.of his handwriting; in fact, he would
say the paper was the same, were it not that
he was positive that there had beea two spots
of red ink on the upper and lower end OF the
paper On which it had been written, and he
erased the spots with an eraser, aud
the paper now showed no evidence
of such erasure. The object of put
ting this paper into the case is not
very clear for the present. Mr.. Cox made d
statement that in accordance with the sug-
gestion from the chairman he had called on
Mathews and requested the production of the
Anderson Weber contract, and that Mathews,
in compliance with that request, had handed
him this paper. Witness still persisted in
declaring that it was not the pa
per he had mailed to Mathews.
Witness was cross-examined infinitely as to
the circumstances attending the signature of
the Anderson Weber contract. At one
tune he testified that it took place at the
Office of Seymour, notary public, and at
another time he expressed doubt whether
one set Of signatures-there were two sets to
the same paper-may have not been at the
customhouse. He could not fix definitely
when the first set had been made, but he in
c.ined to the belief that both sets were signed
at Seymour's office.
In reference to one of these variations, Mr.
Reed said: 'You stated distinctly that the
first set of signatures were executed at Sey-
mour's Office
Witness-Then l am willing to correct it.
Mr.. Reed-Now | want to know whether
that's the truth, or whether you said that
with the intention of deceiving this COM
mittee?
Witness-Allow NE to say that have no
interest In deceiving this committee.
Mr.. Reed-Of that, perhaps we want some
better assurance.
Witness-It IS a matter of indifference to
me whether you want better assurance or
not.
THE SUB COMMITTEE IN FLORIDA.