738 



PUBLIC DOCUMENTS. 



and received back their places, but some time seems 

 to have elapsed before the Kellogg officials took their 

 places back. Indeed, the McEnery Register of Deeds 

 was still acting as such when your committee were 

 in New Orleans, the Kellogg Register never having 

 come to reclaim the place, which was said to be worth 

 nothing now. In Rapides Parish the Kellogg clerk 

 was Mr. Wells's son, who, having yielded his place 

 to the McEnery competitor in September, does not 

 appear to have reclaimed it, and he was accordingly 

 sent for after the election to come from his residence, 

 some miles distant, to sign the returns of the elections, 

 which he did. Your committee are at a loss to see 

 in their action any intimidation of Mr. Wells, still less 

 of the electors of the parish. It so happens that this 

 parish was taken as a sample parish of intimidation, 

 many witnesses from which of both parties were ex- 

 amined with reference to it. They show beyond 

 question that there was a free, full, fair, and peaceable 

 election and registration there ; there was no evidence 

 of any intimidation of voters practised on the day of 

 election, although it was asserted that intimidation 

 of colored men before the election had been effected 

 by threats of refusal to employ them, or to discharge 

 them if they voted the Republican ticket. No evi- 

 dence, either of discharge or of refusal to employ, was 

 produced. Certain witnesses, themselves every one 

 office-holders, testified generally to such action ; but 

 hardly any one was able to specify a single instance 

 in which he heard any employer threaten to dis- 

 charge any voter, or knew of any employe" being so 

 threatened or discharged. Not one single colored 

 man throughout the entire parish was produced to 

 testify, either to such a threat, or to the execution of 

 &ach a purpose, whether before or after the election. 



The action of the Returning Board in the parish of 

 Rapides alone changed the political complexion of 

 the Lower House, and their action in the other par- 

 ishes was equally objectionable ; for instance, in 

 Iberia Parish, it was claimed before your committee 

 that the vote of poll No. 1 in that parish had been re- 

 jected on account of intimidation, but the papers pro- 

 duced by the clerk of the board showed no such 

 proof whatever. One of the counsel, Mr. Ray, pro- 

 duced some affidavits which he declared had been 

 submitted to the board by another of the counsel, 

 General Campbell. The Conservative counsel in- 

 sisted that these papers had never been before the 

 board, when opportunity was given the Republican 

 counsel to show that the paper had been submitted ; 

 but the testimony offered for that purpose by them 

 so far, however, from establishing that'fact, established 

 the reverse. It was then asserted that the returns 

 were rejected because the accounts of the election 

 were not delivered to the Supervisor of Registration 

 within twenty-four hours after the close of the elec- 

 tion, which was six o'clock on the 3d day of Novem- 

 ber, whereas it appeared that, both in the morning 

 and afternoon of the 3d of November, search was 

 made for this Supervisor of Registration for that par- 

 ish in order to deliver to him these returns, ana he 

 was not to be found until after six o'clock, but that as 

 soon as he could be found on the evening of that day 

 they were offered to him, and again reoffered the next 

 morning, but were refused to Be received. Yet this 

 same Supervisor of Registration, who received other 

 Republican returns, after he had refused to receive 

 these Conservative ones, on the ground that they 

 were too late, and the Returning Board, although it 

 had held, as to other polls 'in the State, that the re- 

 turns were not to be rejected merely because they 

 were sent too late, rejected the returns from this poll, 

 and thereby changed the representation of the parish 

 from Conservative to Republican. So in the parish of 

 De Sato, the returns showed a Conservative elected 

 by over 1,000 majority. It was alleged that the Super- 

 visor of Registration had brought the returns to New 

 Orleans, and had left them with a woman of bad 

 character, who 1 offered to produce them on payment 

 of $1,000. The Conservative Committee took legal 



proceedings to compel their production, but the 

 court held that it had no jurisdiction to that end. 

 They then caused to be produced before the board 

 the duplicates of those returns from the office of the 

 Secretary of State, together with the tally-sheets, 

 poll-lists, etc., filed there according to law. These 

 duplicates correspond exactly with the alleged result 

 of the compiled returns which the said woman had 

 produced; and of these alleged facts undisputed 

 proof was submitted to the board. Nevertheless the 

 board refused to count that vote for the parish. So 

 in Winn Parish, where 404 Conservative and 164 Re- 

 publican votes were cast, upon a verbal protest that 

 the registrar of elections was not properly qualified of 

 which the only proof was that he had failed to forward 

 his oath of office to the Secretary of State although 

 there was no pretense that the election was not a fair 

 representation of the will of the people, the whole vote 

 of the parish was rejected, and the case referred to the 

 Legislature. So in Terre Bonne Parish, where there 

 was a Conservative majority, it was proved that the 

 Commissioners of Election, through misapprehen- 

 sion of their duties, inclosed all the returns in the 

 ballot-boxes, and deposited them with the clerk of 

 the court, with whom the law required the boxes to 

 be left. The judge of the court thereupon issued a 

 mandamus commanding the clerk to take the returns 

 from the boxes and forward them to the Secretary of 

 State, which was done. Nevertheless, the boara re- 

 jected the returns from these polls, thereby giving the 

 parish to the Republicans, with the result of choos- 

 ing a Republican Senator, two Republican members 

 of the Legislature, and the Republican parish-officers. 

 Without now referring to other instances, we are 

 constrained to declare that the action of the Return- 

 ing Board on the whole was arbitrary, unj ust, and in 

 our opinion illegal ; and that this arbitrary, unjust, 

 and illegal action alone prevented the return of a ma- 

 jority of the Conservative members to the Lower 

 House. Upon the general subject of the state of 

 affairs in the South, and as to whether the alleged 

 wrongs to colored citizens for political offenses are 

 real, or were asserted without due foundation, your 

 committee took such proof as the opportunity offered. 

 Both parties agreed upon four parishes as samples of 

 the condition of affairs in that respect in the State. 

 Of these, owing to the impossibility of procuring wit- 

 nesses from the locality in time, your committee 

 were obliged to confine their especial examination to 

 two parishes. They received all the testimony that 

 was offered, and in addition they received all the tes- 

 timony that was then on hand in New Orleans, of- 

 fered by either party, as to the condition of affairs in 

 other parts of the State. As a whole, they are con- 

 strained to say that the intention charged is not borne 

 out by the facts before us. No general intimidation 

 of Republican voters was established. No colored 

 man was produced who had been threatened or as- 

 saulted by any Conservative because of political opin- 

 ion, or discharged from employment or refused em- 

 ployment. Of all those who testified to intimidation, 

 there was hardly any one who of his own knowledge 

 could specify a reliable instance of such acts, and of 

 the white men who were produced to testify generally 

 on such subjects very nearly all, if not every single 

 one, was the holder of an office. Throughout the 

 rural districts of the State the number of white Re- 

 publicans are very fe^: it hardly extends beyond 

 those holding office and those connected with them. 

 No witnesses, we believe, succeeded in naming in any 

 parish five Republicans who supported the Kellogg 

 government who were not themselves office-holders 

 or related to office-holders, or those having official 

 employment. On the other hand, applications to the 

 United States Commissioners in the various parishes, 

 not only for alleged crimes, but because of alleged 

 threats of discharge and non-employment, or other 

 interference with political preference, were frequent. 

 Upon these applications warrants were often issued 

 and white citizens arrested and bound over for trial. 



