Year: 1877




Hon. G. W. JONES, United States
Senator from Florida, lets in some new
light on the situation in that State. de
says that he has been sstonished to see
how utterly misunderstood has bean the
action of the Returning Board under the
order OF the Supreme Court, even by
members of the Senate. The disputed
counties at the first count were Hamil-
ton, Manatee, Monroe and Jackson. By
throwing out TILDEN msjolities In those
counties q small majority was counted
for HAYES in the State. In obedience 10
the direct mandate of the Supreme Court
the returns from these counties were count
ed at the second count. The decree OF the
court was that the board should exercise no
judicial functions and should throw out
no returns unless false and fraudulent on
their face. in order to make an appear
ance of complying with the decision OF
the Supreme Court, and at the same time
throw out enough TILDEN votes to give
HAYES the State, the Board ut its second
count perpetrated greater fraud than
at the first, for the second time they de-
clared to be false and fl isudulent on their
face the returns from Baker and Clay
counties, which AZ the first count they
had accepted as legal and fair. The
fac.. rncerning the vote in these coun-
ties Senator JONES declares to be as fol.
lows:


In Clay county, when the county can
vassers looked over the returns of the
precinct inspectors, they found that one
inspectors had failed to send up certif-
cate showing that he had been duly
sworn There was no question but that
the return was correct, and the county
canvassers so certified to the State Re-
turning Board, but, because of the irreg-
ularity named, the county canvas sers did
not include the return of this one inspec-
tor in their consolidated return, but sent it
up separate, with all the facts for the State
board 10 adjudicate on. When the mat
ter came before the State board they
ruled that the county canvassers had no
auth ority under the law for excluding
the return of this one inspector from
the consolidated return, so they included
it and certified all as the fair and legal
vote of the county. Now this same
board has said that this return, which
they before certified as fair and legal, is
false and fraudulent on its face.


The case in Baker county is even
worse. Baker county is one of the white
counties and it Is always Democratic, but
new sets of returns were sent up from
that county to the Returning Board.
Under the law it became the duty OF the
Clerk of the Circui. Court to notify the
County Judge to meet him at his (the
Clerk's) office, on a certain day, and to-
gether recount the votes of the county.
The original returns were in the hands
of the Clerk, and duplicates were IN the
hands of the Judge, both deposited in ac-
cordsnce with the law. On the appoint
cd day the Judge refused to meet
with the Clerk, and so the Clerk
called in Justice of the Peace
and with HIM went over the returns of
the whole county and sent them to the
State Board. The Judge met in some
unknown place, called in Justice OF the
Peace, who had received his appoint
ment after this duty was to bo performed
and sent to the State Board what pur-
ported to be their count of two precincts
only. The State Board considered the
two, decided that the clerks coant was
the correct one, and so certified. Now
this same Board says this return is false
and fraudulent on its face.


Senator JONES still asserts that there is
no shadow of doubt but that the State
cast its electoral vote for TILDEN, and q
fair count will so show.