St. Landry democrat., 1892-04-16
A FINAL APPEAL.
Address to the Democracy OF the
State.

make the following extracts:
When the count OF Concordia Wa
reached, the contest which had bee
filed against the returns from that pal
lsh, after they had been closed and fol
warded, was rejected by the committe
on the ground that no vote could b
questioned before the committee whic
had not been challenged at the poll, au,
of which no mention was made in tn
commissioners returns.
The same ruling WAS made with ref
erence to the contest for the parish y
st. Bernard, where the commissioners
returns were regular and gave no motto,
| Of contest.
In the parish Of 81. James the con,
! tested box was pulstd OF illegal votes
| because the commissioners in signing
the returns protested against their re.
/ ceptiOu and stated the grounds upon
which the voters had been challenged.
In the parish of st. Mary the illegal
votes which the committee rejected
were contested by the commissioners
and the contest forwarded with the re-
turns.
In the parish Of Sabine one Of the
boxes was purged OF 100 illegal votes.
maDifestly forged on tho returns after
they had been signed.
1n all these parishes it will he seen
that all lawful votes were counted. the
illegal votes only being excluded But
in the consideration of the contest
against the sixth, eighth and ninth
wards Of the city of New Orleans an
opposite rule was applied.
ln the first poll of the sixth ward,
giving the McEnery ticket a majority of
757 votes, the commissioners We're per-
mitted to contradict their official re-
turns, which certified that only 81 votes
had been challenged, and gave it as
their opinion that half the votes poIled
was illegal Notwithstanding the testi-
moDy of witnesses we'll acquainted with
the voters, who swOre that the vote was
lawful, all were excluded from the
count and canvass by the committee,
because it was supposed that half should
have been excluded by the commits
slOners.
ln the second poll of the eighth ward,
giving sos majority for the McEnery
ticket, the entire vote was excluded
from the count aud canvass because
some thirty persons were found to state
that they had voted for Foster, and this
was in excess of the number returned
for him. 80 having been 50 returned, and
it being claimed that he had received
Gl. No fraud was alleged; none prov
ed, and every commissioner aud officer
connected with the election swOre that
no illegal vote was received and none
counted, except as cast. Yet sos voters
were disfranchised because, at most
thirty people either misrepresented the
ticket they had voted or a mistake in
the count had been made to that extent.
But the necessities of the case required
that the r oster vote in this box should
be counted, while all those cast for Nc
Emery he excluded, because otherwise
Messrs. Cunningham, Pickett and Heard
would have been defeated, even after
the sixth and ninth wards were disfran-
chised.
In the second precinct of the ninth
ward, giving the McEnery ticket a ma
lorlty OF 400 votes, the whole vote was
thrown out because the commissioners,
a majority OF whom were appointed by
the + telcampaign committee, refused
to permit Mr.. ZeD2el, a Foster manager
IN that ward, to bring with him TO wit /
ness the count all individual objection F.,
able to the commissioners. 1t is not
pretended that Mr.. Zengel himself was
denied admittance on the contrary, he /,
was invited to enter, but because lie re-
fused to do SO the voters of that precinct
were disfrancbised, not because of any
fraud alleged or proved to have been
but because in the.iudgment
of majority of the committee, it could
have been committed, aud they, there
fore. presumed it had been done, con |
[rary to every rule of the law and ,
evidence.
In the third and fifth precincts of the
nlnth ward 1t appeared that the McEu- !
ery commissioners had, at the instance
ot those representing the Foster ticket,
agreed to increase the vote by adding
names to the poll lists Of persons who
had not voted and divide the vote be,
tweenthe etWOcandidates,so soas MOTTO affect
the result. the object being to increase
the representation of the ward in the !
party conventions. The fraudulent !
vote was proved with exactness; The !
validity Of the remainder woe .;,. 1eni. !,
ed; yet the whole was excluded-the !
honest |, voters dlsfranchised because of !
The frauds OF those whom the Foster |
committee had appointed to hold the |
electiOn and over whom the voters had !
40 control.
The final result is that by usurpation |
oft power not granted toit the committee I
ot seven attempted, by adopting the |
methods OF the Wells -Andelso son Return |
ng Board OF infamous memory, to re- !
verse the result Of the election, defeat |
he will OF the people aud declare q |
,lcket confessedly beaten the nominees |
IT the party. AS the edicts of the Re- !
5urnlng Board were expected to be |
maintained by Federal power, so the |
'dlct OF this Returning Board is expected ,
o DO maintained by an abuse of the
election laws OF the State and fraudu-
ent suppression of the will OF the peo- |
Die at the general election.
lie Democracy OF Louisiana is called |
lpon, to decide whether the foregoing
rands are to be indotsed or reprobated:
md whether you will permit the laws of |
lie State to be prOstituted to carry them
nto effect; whether the usurpation of
bower by the committee is to be sub
nltted to or repudiated; whether we
ire to stultlfy the record of the Demo-
'ratlc party i'll denouncing the acts of
he, Wells-Anderson Returning Board
md now confess they ere proper meth
,ds of arriving at the results Of an cleo
the minority shall die
ate party nominations and accomplish
'y fraud when it fails by fair election;
whether McEDery aud bis associates are
entitled to your support by virtue Of
nomination by the people or Foster and
lis colleagues by tile attempted frauds
If the Young Returning Board
we appeal to you not to ,eopardise
he success Of the Democratic ticket and
'euder the election of Republican
possible by giving your support to the
Foster ticket, which has already been
vice repudiated by the people aud can
ay no claim TO be the egular nominees
,f the Democratic party.
by order of tho committee.
LEON JASTREMSEl +