The Louisiana Conspiracy

The testimony of C. B. Darrall, a Republican Congressman f rom Louisinna, conflrms the story of Anderaon in most of its details. Dari'all wanted the office of Collector of the fort of New Orleans, and was supported by the influence of Stanley Matthews, which he Becnrod through Anderson. Durrail is confldent that ho would hare gained his point, büt for the Presidenfs obllgation to old Wells and the Rcturning-Board Anderson, who wauted to control everything themsclves. A more parish Supervisor und an ex-Cotigressman could not expoct to prevail against the inüueuce of the two men who liad the power to count out ten thousand Tilden votes, and useJ it. Mr. Hayes' adherence to the Returning Board gang, in spite of all opposition, is eonvineing proof that he fnlly appreciated the magnitude of their services - and the extent of theii knowledge. He knew how many other hearts would acho if Wells began to squeal, and kept the old reprobate's manger full of fodder, that there might bo no proTOcation for sqnealiug. Rutherford B. Hayes is open to the charge of tampering with witneases. The Demócrata wero greatly disappointed in Darrall's nnwillingness to testify. He had been talking very plainly to them for a day or two, aüd even up to within a couplo of hours of his appearance before the committee was pouring tho tale of lus wrongs info the willing ears of McMahon. Just before he went on tho stand Hayes sent for him, and from that time DarreU's tone changed. After the close of the examination he received anothor summons from tl ie White House, and was closetad there a long time. Ho is certain to have somo sood appointment within the next month. Anderson Further Corroborateil. A Washington telegram of tho 12th inst. to the Chicago Times says : Summing up carefully to-day's testimony, there ía a wide percentage in favor of the truth of the story of James E. Anderson, as given before Pott r's committee. Ex-Congressman Darrall was upon the stand the greater pari of the day, and continued his iudecent exhibition of the dirty, dishonest prácticos of the school of Louisiana politics. Darrell bas cvidently been coaclied by the administration to do his best to break down AnderEon's testimony, but he has liad so little preparation that his testimony has only resultod in showing his dishonest intentions without accomplishing anything. He swore to the bad repntation of Anderson at a certain timo, when it was immediately shown by cross-examination that he saw nothing in Anderson to prevent him from being intímate with him and using him. He acknowledged also that after he failtd to get the office of Collector he wrote a letter to Anderson advising him to " go for the blanked hypocritical, psalm-singing people at the White House." He believed enough in Mr. Anderson to use him for the purposes of blackmail, and the franknessof this witness in acknowledging his share in the blackmail was not the least remarkablo part of his testimony. Mr. Butler asked him if hc did not consider his use of Anderson's documenta ae blackmailing. Mr. Darrall said "Yes." The Weber-Anderson agreement was substantiated to-day by as good testimony as should be necded. Seymour, the notary, and one of the witnesses, testified to the documents being made out before them. They did not know Weber, but had no reason to believe it was anybody else but him. Pay magiër Sraitli's KxamiDatlon. After the examination of Darrall, Paymaster Srnith was called to the witness chair. The chief point of his testimony concerned the President's apparent prejudice against Anderson, the Louisiana Supervisor. At Auderson's request Smith called on the President to get his indorsement or approval of the appointment of Anderson to a better office than Smith had.offered him. Anderson wantod something worth 83,000 a ycar, and thought he would get it if he could see Mr. Hayes. The latter, with strong appearance of disgust, refused to be inierviewed by Anderson, and gave Smith to understand that he did not think the Supervisor had a good claim for so lucrative an office, but did not object to giving him a minor appointment. The efïbrt of Smith to show Mr. Hayes' contempt for the Anderson sort of people was not particularly credituble to Hayes. It merely showed that, having pocketed the proceeds of Anderson's dishonesty, the President wanted to get rid of him as quickly and cheaply as possible. He despised the swindler as mon aro apt to do under such circumstances, whilo cheerfully accepting the proflts of the swindle. Gen. Butler asked Smith if he had been in cousultation with anybody at the White House in relation to his testimony. The other Repnblicans on the committee objected to the question, and Smith refused to answer unless expressly reqnired to do ! so by the committee. He might as well have answered in the offirmative, for nothing would have been easier than a denial, if he could have safely made it. The administration people seem to be making a practice of capturing and "camming" witnesses summoned by the commitlce - a practice that, if persisted in, may demand action on the part of the House. Secretary Sherman's lawyer is said to have tried this plan with Mre. Jenks, wlio is supposed to know something about the Sherman letter, of which so muoh has been said, and the visits of Darrall to Mr. Hayes, while his examination was unünished, are disagreeably suggestive. Jolin Sherman Attempts a Diversion. Having appeared before the Commit tce of Investigation, and, in effect, confessed that he wroto the Anderson letter, Mr. John Shermau finds that he has not helpcd his case, and deerns it advipablo to make some furthor attempt. Here is what he now proposes, as it is stated in the New York Ti-res : Washinotcx, Juno 7. Tho Potter Investigating Committco was in pecret pespion to-day. A communicacation was received from Secri tary Sherman, ricitiüg that ho ia chargod in tho prcamblc to the resolution authorizing the invertí igation with com]ilicity in clection fiands in Ijonisiana, and requeitinp; that immediate inquiry be made iuto thia chargn. Tho Secretary furniht:d the committee vi h the ñames of abont 6 f tv witnesseB, who, he 8ay, will prove that outrages and intimidat'.on were peri)otrated upon whito and black RopubliGan oters in Louisiana to such an extent aa to deter them from exercif-ing their rights at the polls, aud requested that thefee wimesses be called. This written communication is almost as decidedly a con'ession as was tho oral tcstimouy which Mr. Shemnn gave on Saturday week. He is charged with being accessory to the preparation of fraudulent documents concerning the election in Louisinna, and with conspiriug tr chango tho truc returns of that electio. so as to givo the electoral votes of the State to Rutherford B. Hayc s when thcy belonged to Samuel J. Tilden. These are tho things which this committee is appointed to investígate, and Mr. Sherman's invitation to inquire into something entirely different says, about as plainly B8 words can say, that the proper inquiry of tho committee is ono that he wishes to evade - is one dangerous to him and to the administratiou of which he inakrs a pnrfc. This new movo of Mr. Sherman's won't avail to draw away attention from the facls i lready established against him through evidepce of his qwü, These facts nro that wlien two Supervisors of rtcgistrntion iu Louisiann, having charge of the eleetion in two parishes in which a Bepublican majority wan absolutely incÜBpensabie to the counting in oí the Hayes electora, were on the poiiit of pubüshing the truth when the election in their parishes had not only resulted largely iu faror of the Demócrata, bnt lina been ordcrly and peaceful, furnishing to the llettirning Doard 110 ground for throwing ont votea or altering rtturns - when these Supervisors wero on the point of revealing the nature of the protest ■which had been made in their nanicü, then Mr. Sherman, having given theül oral prornises on which they would not rest, wrote to tliem the following letter : New Orlkans, Nov. 20, 1876. Gentlemen : Your noto of eveu date hna been received. Neither Mr. Hayes, mytelf, the gentlemen who accompanv me. or the country at largo can ever forget the obligations under which you will have placed na, s-hould jou stand flrm in the position yon have taken. From a long and intimate acquaintauce with Goy. Haye, I am juntlfied n assuming roeponsibility for promises made, and will guárante that you Bhall be provided for as aoon after lbo 4üi of March as may bo practicable, and iu midi mauner as will enabls you boih to leave Louisiana, xhould you deem it necessary. Vcry truly yours, John Sheiiman. Mr. I. A. Webcr aud Jumce E. Audcrson. This letter, with lus own refusal positively to disclaim its authorship, makes out the case against him ; and wheu he attempts to leave these pointsand go into other spheres, snch, for instance, as contending that in flfty cases in Louisiana Republican volers were kept away from the polls, bis proposition is wholly extraueous to the subject. Wüat Sherman has to deal with is his own letter. Let him confine himself to that. - New York Sun. What Will lie Done With Darrall ? It is understood that before Darrall went upon the witnets stand a bargain was effected with him on behalf of certain persons in high station wbom his testimony, true or false, was likely to blacken. That the bargain either was known to the President or was to be made known to him by Darrall, is appartnt: In answer to a question by Mr. Biackburn, the witness Kaid that yestcrday he waited in the committee room until after 1 o'clock, when, desiring to seo the President before le&ving the city, he went to Senate and informed Mr. Kellogg that he was going to the White Houfe, and if the committee desired nis attendance a telegram would find him there. Upou reaching the White House the Sergeantrat-Arms overtook him, and he returned forthwith. He had business with the President, and hearing ho was goiug away desired to see him before he left. What "business" could this scoundrel have with the President of the United States ? To find a substantial difference between him and Anderson in his favor is very difficult. Darrall was a candidato for the New Orleans Collectorship. He learned from Anderson that the latter was possessed of Shermau's letter, of letters from Matthews, uud oí documenta by which representatives and partisans of the adminieiration could be seriousïy ïunoyed. He swears that he knew Andersou was a monstrous liar, a perjurer, a forger, and a blackmailer; yet he procecded to do all he could to procure Anderson au appointmenr, and to use Anderson and his masked battery of blackmail as the means of securing the New Orleana Collectorship for himself. He called on the President shortly after his inauguration, and reconimended to him Anderson's appointment, giving as his reasons Andersou's active part in Louisiana politics, and his intelligence ! It appears to have been after this interview with Darrall that Mr. Hayes wrote the reference of Anderson's successful application for a Oonsulship to the Secretary of State. Darrall explieitly swears that he sought Andersou's assistance for himself with Stanley Matthews aIer he knew tliat Matthews had been threatened in a blackmailing manncr by Anderson, toward whoin, he says, Matthews remained woll disposed in spit; of Anderson's threat aud insults. Ben Butler compellcd Darrall to confess, notwitustanding his persistent attempt at evasion, that he erjgaged in this blackmail co-partuership even before he was out of his seat iu CoBgress. Mr. Butler (interrupting) - Pardon me, you were about to becomo a candidato for a high office uuder the Government. Here was a drimken, miserable fellow down in Louisiana, or hid been there - a man who jou had leiraed had got a corrupt agreement to have the Naval Ofticerehip - you, a member cf Congress who had not yet been unteatcd, and you about to niaKe an application - don't j-ou know whether that rascal came aud made an offer of services to you or you went to cim? A. Wel!, sir, Anderson and mvdelf had had e. conversation in regard to the Golloctorship before I became a candidate. In regard to Packard " Q. Leave him out. A. About myself I eau' swear whether the suggestion came from him or me, or from sumo friend of mino. Q. I mean the suggestion that the loafer should take part of it. That'd what I want. A. I remember writing Anderson about that matter. Q. Liidn't you wriíe him to come over and help you ? A. I wrote him a nuniber of lettere. Q. (sharply.) Did you write to him, before he said anvthing to you, tocóme and help you? A. I Ihink'l did. Q. Don't you believe you did ? A. That's my best recollection. Unless I uaw the letter I Cüuld not teil. Q. What induced you to go to Philadelphia for this miserable man to aidyouiu your candidatura ? A. I stated that Anderson had suggested the matter to me a nuniber of times, and it was bo undcritond. He beid papers or documents that the powers that were wonid be willing and glad to listen to. Still later, hc made this admission : Q. If thee documenta had not been publisbed you would have heen willing to havo owed your election to the efforts of a perjnrer and blackmailür with false document!) as Collector at one of the princip.il ffice 'I A. You have stated him to be such. Q. Yon youriT-lf stated it now. A. Not of my öwn pertonal knowledgo. Q. You knew the man to bo corrupt. You believed his sffidavit to be falso. You knew his acqnaintances would say he was a drunkard, aud you knew tbat using these documents for this p'urposo was simply blackmailing. A. Certin)y. Q. Then haven't you Btated all that I have A. Hubatantially. Q. Then we don't 8ub-antia]ly differ, and you tre son y j on f ailed ? A. Naturally. The spirit of this fellow's testimony, from bezinning to end, shows that he has been coached by parties interested, and his fruitless determination not to teil anytliiug which he could contrive to conceal is one of the most discouraging features of these disclosures. The presumption of a bargain is irresistible ; and Darrall's cool cali at the White FTousp, because lie did not like to leave Washington without saying adieu to Mr. Hayes, will awaken a solicitude to watch tho future progress of Mr. Darrall's relations with the administratdop and the high personage, whom, in his sadder momeuts, he cbaracterized as the " singing hypocrite." Inipeachmeut lor Jolm Sherman. Secretary Sliciman is in the toils. One caee for imjieachment is clearly mode against him bythe Glover Investigating Committee. To defray the expenses of the Louisiana Commission ho borrowed $5,000 of the First National Biirk of New York, a rcember of the Syudicate. This was borrowing money iu anticipation of an appropriation, an uuluwful act. The morjey has never been repaid. Oougrcss will never apnrNpriate a dollar to pay the exi i:808 of this trading commission. Tho mouf.y loaned by the First National Bank was furnished in New York drafts to the disbursing agent. These drnfts w.ero cashed at the subtreasury iu New Orleans. This is an indictable oftVnse. Another thing against Sherman in this matter is the secr t maDner employed by him in negotiating this loan, and his not prteenting afterward the facti in the case to Congress when he asked for money to make it good. This ill-fated Louisiana Commission has been in bad enough odor without this dirty scandal to come as a Eeouel to their long chapter of ing