Press enter after choosing selection

How Louisiana Was Carried

How Louisiana Was Carried image
Parent Issue
Day
8
Month
December
Year
1876
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

This is the explanation ot' huw the Louisiana infainy was perpotrated which caine over the wires froni New Orleans on Tuesday evening : The Bubjoined statement of grounds acted upoa has been obtained trom the counsel of the returning officers: The Retuming Board of the State of Louisiana claim, tirst that under the provis' ions of tho law thoy are roturning officers of all elections held in said State ; that there are in law and in tact no returns of tmy election held in said State until tirst examined, canvassed and ompiled by them ; that statements furnished by commissioners of elections are simply statements of votes purported to have beon cast, and that uutil the fairness and legality of the voting at the poll or precinct have been passed upon by the returning officers no validity attacties to any such statement. In strict compliance with the laws of the United States and this State, the returning offioers of the State of Louisiaua have proceeded to examine, oanvass and compilo statements of tho votes puvported to have been cast in this State at a general election for Presideut and Vice-President of the United States, held on the 7th of November last. The votes purported to have been oast in the parishes of Grant and East Feliciana have been ignored entirely in the official canvass. In Grant Parish not onu form of law was observad. Thqre were no legal Supervisors or Commissioners of Election and the vote taken was as informal as votos taken on a railroad train. In East Feliciana the ruturning offiuors were unablc to fiud one poll at whioh from ovidenoe before them they could certify that a full free aud fair election was had. In the Pttrish of East Baton Rouge the roturning oííicers canvassed and compiled the votes of three polls situated in the City of Baton Rouge, where there was military protection afforded. and also three other polls situated imïnodiately on tho river where thore was ooinparative itumunity from intimidatioo. The evidence as to intimidation by murder, by hanging, whipping or other outragos as vffecting the vote at othe'r poll, was so conclusivo that the returning officers unanimously rejected tho votes stated to have been cast at these polls. In tho adjoining parish of West Foliüinda, the statement of' votes cast at the six polls were rejected on similar oonclusive evidence. In the Parish of Ouachita eight polls wore rejected, whilst in the City of Monroe, the parish seat of that parish, tho statements of votos cast were accepted, because the voters there were measurably protocted from violence by the prosenco of United States troops. The United States deputy marshal in charge of the ballot-box at ono of the rpjected polls was shot, and throughout the whoJe parish there prevailod systematio intimidation, murder and violence towards one class of voters, whito as woll as black, of sucha character as to have scarcely a parallnl in the history of this State. In the adjoining parish, Morehouse, statements of votes reported to be cast in six polls wero rójected on similar evidence. Polls were also re jected in the Parishes of DeSoto, Boasier, Franklin, Claiborne and Calcasien, upon clear evidence of fraud uot rebutted by evidence offered before the returning offioers.

Article

Subjects
Old News
Michigan Argus