Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1879-03-04

4 committee, submitted 4 report winch ne ma
prepared to the committee, and 1t was adopt
publicans, General Butler being absent. Tn
three Republicans, Hiscock, Cox and Reed
| Will prepare min Ority report.
| Mr.. Stenger, ID mocratic member of tn
| committee, who was chairman of the sub
/ committee In Louisiana, has also prepared
| report.
Mr.. Potter's report is necessarily long, as
deals with all the points that have been be
1 tore the committee, except the cipher dis
| patches, which will be made the subject of &
| separate report, and will be presented to thu
/ committee to morrow. Mr.. Potter report il
| regarded by the Democrats who have peruseC
/ It as singulary impartial and judicial. They
say it is entirely devoid both of rhetorIca
OrnamentatIon and vituperative denuncia.
| ton, and derives its force solely from close
| logical deduction of facts presented to the
| committee. Some of the Democrats regard
| 1t as venting IN color, or not as strongly ex-
pressed as the facts warrant, and 1t Is I'M
| likely that some of the members of the COM
| mittee belonging to the party will present an
additional expression OF their views. The re-
| port of Mr.. Potter, IN the opening, sets forth
what 1t was proper Tor congress to investigate
| aud what was not, and the difficulty OF con-
dUchng an investigation into consplraces
which have been successfully earned out
while the successful party remain IN power.
II admits that the confessions of consplratOrs
who have become dissatisfied is worth little,
| but points to the TACT, not generally under
stood, that about the essential features of the
election and canvass in Florida and Louisi-
ana, there ls no substantial dispute before
| the committee, the Republicans having
called no Witnesses IN Florida and few In
Louisiana except as to the conduct OF the VS.
ting statesmen, ana incidentally about IN
tmidAtioE. 1t dismisses entirely the
testimony of Anderson, jerks, Mrs.
jerks, Weber. and that class of
witnesses, and deals with the case
upon general and controlling facts alone.
The report is divided into three parts, the first
OF which refers to Florida, the second to Lou
isisna, and the third to the forged electoral
certificate. Beginning with Florida, 1t cites
the law directing the Presidential electors to
be appointed by he votes cast. and the can
vassiUg- board to canvass the votes cast,
claiming that the Tilden electors, having re-
ceived a majority of the votes cast II this
State, were necessarily entitled 10 be declared
elected, and that the canvassing board, by
rejecting without warrant OF law, Il portion of
the votes, so as to show a majority of the
votes for Hayes, unlawfuIly counted TIlden
out. 1t states that the canvassers delayed
their announcement until the morning of the
day the electors were to meet and vote, so
that, although action was taken to GUST the
Hayes electors, no decision cosld be had till
the Hayes electors had met that same day at
neon and voted. The report then reCltes
the Judgment of the supreme court, which
subst quently decided that the Hayes electors
were not elected nor entitled to cast the vote
Of the State, and that the TIlden electors
were; and also the Judgment of :he court IN
the action brought by Drew, the Democratic
candidate for governor, where the court d.
rected a recanvass, and decided that the can
vassers, IN refusing to count the votes cast,
had defrauded Drew. and had unlawfully
seated Stearns. The legislature OF the State
thereupon directed recanvass OF the cleo.
toral vote In accordance with this decision of
the supreme court, the Judges of which were
Republicans, and the reCanvass showed that
the TIlden electors had been chosen. The
governor then issued his certificate to the
Tilden electors as the true Presiden-
tial electors. but the electoral commits
sion refused to consider the judgment Of the
court, the action of the legislature, and
of the 1ilden electors, and held that it could
not take notice of any action by the State
after the sixth of December. The report
draws attention TO the fact that such a wrong
might be reported In any State and at any
Presidential election by the canvassers with
holding the announcement OF the result or
the election until the day fixed for the meet
ing of the electoral college, and then declar-
ing persons who had never been voted for at
all to be elected; when, according to this
decision, such electors would be entitled ire
vocaby to cast the vote of the State. 1t
therefore recommends a law providing
that where there is dispute as to who were
the real electors of any State, the Judgment
Of its court of last resort shall be certified to
congress before the meeting of the two houses
of congress to receive and count the electoral
votes. and shall be conclusive as to the right
of disputing electors, aud which vote
from the State shall be counted unless the
two houses of congress shall otherwise agree.
The report then argues that the ac-
ton of the canvassing- board was not
only Illegal but fraudulent, and cites
an instance in which they rejected Democratic
votes on unwarranted grounds and refused
to reject fraudulent Republican votes. 1t
deals at length with the claim OF the Repub-
liclns that they were entitled to the vote OF
the State on the face of the returns, by reason
Of the Drigger fraud, by which bogus return
from Baker county was furnished the can
vassing board, which they at first rejected,
but which, after they were ordered to count
the vote as cast, they traudnlently took IN
place of the true return. 1t then deals with
the conduct of the visiting statesmen, and
particularly that Of General ROyes, as con-
trastsd with that of General Francis C.
Barlow, whose fidelity to all his obligations,
and integrity, independence, fairness and
truth, the report especially commends. In
regard to Louisiana, the report begins with
reference to the anomalous power possessed
by the returning board, which it says never
before existed elsewhere. Under it the
electors and returning officers held the
grossest power over the receiving and count
ing of votes. Under the pretext that the
color-line divided political parties, they
had used this power to tTauouiently count the
State for the Republicans, and had been e.
posed by Republican committee OF the forty
third congress, which had reported that
the whites and blacks of the State being
equal, and some OF the blacks and all the
whites having voted for the Democrats IN
1874, the State had necessarily been carried
by them, although counted for the Repub-
ticans. Hereupon the Republicans set about
A false census, in which they made it appear
that there were twenty-five thousand more
black voters in the State than white, and, as
illustrating the fraudulent nature of this
census the report refers to the fact that while
ihls census reported but fifty-seven thousand
coored men, women and children In New
Orleans, 1t made out of them nearly twenty
FIVE thousand tive hundred cOlored voters. 1t
then instances the fraudulent registration
that was based upon this fraudulent census,
whereby 1t was made to appear that the
registered Republican voters exceeded the
white voters IN the State more than twenty
three thousand, While actually there were no
more, and the refusal Of the authorities to
correct this false registration in cases where
It's faiseness was pointed out. From this the
report recites the direction by the Republican
authorities to the supervisors Of parishes, re-
curing them to return the votes according to
toe census: that is, stating that cOlCred
adults, by that census, in their parishes, were
50 many, and that they were expected to re-
turn a Republican vote correspond
ing 10 that if they expected any re-
Uar5 OF preferment. Notwithstanding this
orgsn;zed fraud, says the report, when the