delivered in the presence of the two
visiting bodies, but was reported to the President and was published
by Congress. Whatever opinions may be expressed as to the correctness
of the findings of the returning board, there can be no doubt that
its proceedings were open, fair and impartial. The board arrived
at the conclusion that the Republican electors received a majority
of the votes cast in Louisiana at that election, and were entitled
to cast the vote of the state for President of the United States.
During the great excitement over this controversy, and also over
that in South Carolina and Florida, exaggerated statements, without
the slightest foundation, of frauds and improper conduct on the
part of the returning officers were made and published. As to the
action of the returning board of Louisiana, I feel bound now, after
a long lapse of time, to repeat what was reported to General Grant
by the Republican visitors, that it made a fair, honest and impartial
return of the result of the election. In concluding our report we
said:
"The proof of violence and intimidation and armed disturbance in
many other parishes, is of the same general character, although
more general and decisive, as to the five parishes particularly
referred to. In the others, these causes prevailed at particular
polling places, at many of which the Republican vote was, to a
considerable extent, prevented.
"We hope to be able to furnish full copies of all testimony taken
by the board, that the justice of its conclusions may be appreciated.
It is a tribunal, from which there can be no appeal, and, in view
of the possible consequences of its adjudication, we have closely
observed its proceedings and have carefully weighed the force of
a large mass of the testimony upon which that adjudication has been
reached.
"The members of the board, acting under oath, were bound by law,
if convinced by the testimony that riot, tumult, acts of violence,
or armed disturbance did materially interfere with the purity and
freedom of election at any poll or voting place, or did materially
change the result of the election thereat, to reject the votes thus
cast, and exclude them from their final return. Of the effect of
such testimony, the board was sole and final judge, and if, in
reaching a conclusion, it exercised good faith and was guided by
an honest desire to do justice, its determination should be respected,
even if, upon like proof, a different c
|