Democratic Sentinel, Volume 3, Number 5, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 March 1879 — MINORITY REPORT. [ARTICLE]

MINORITY REPORT.

Gen. Butler’s Conclusions. Thi Counting In of H a Yes Obt Alito fit A Sebies of Gboss FbauCs. Washington, March 5. Gen. Butler says, in his report upon the Potter investigation: “I have chosen to examine only the political and party action of both parties, their leaders and their manipulation of the election in the State of Louisiana, whera it would seem every form of wrong, misconduct, and outrage possible to be done in an election is alleged to have been committed on one side or the other.” The General concludes that in 1876 there was ho full and free election by the whole body of electors of the Shite of Louisiana, and that the electoral vote df that State Ought not therefore to have been counted in favot of either candidate for the Presidency; that, if any legal election was held in Louisiana, then the majority of the votes actually cast in the S*a.te were for the Tilden electors and for Gov. Nicholls; that in Case the vote of the State is counted at all the votes of the “ bulldozed parishes,” as they were called, were within the fair and just exercise of the jurisdiction of the Returning Board, to be rejected in the proper exercise of their judgment, v ith the exception of some few polling precincts not material to the result; that in parts of the State other than said bulldozed parishes, where a full campaign was made by both political parties, the majority of votes were cast for Packard for Governor, and a portion of the Tilden electors, leaving two or more Hayes electors elected; that sucn a count and return would have given full expression to the will of the people in such parte of the State as were not affected by coetciou and violence in favor of Packard, and against two or mote of the Haves electors, which Wotild have given the Presidency to Tilden, as would have been the case if the whole vote of the State had been rejected by both houses. The declaration by both houses of Congress that under the circumstances the State of Louisiana should not be counted for either candidate would have been the best possible result to the country, because it would have taught a lesson to over-zealous partisans that elections cannot be carried either by force or intimidation at the p ills or by frauds in returns, so as to avail the successful candidate; and if so carried by either the vote would be rejected by the final counting tribunal. Ou the contrary, under the rulings of the Electoral Commission, if they are accepted as the governing law, every encouragement Is - given to reckless, strenuous partisans to carry their States either by force or by fraud; that the Electoral Commission, as constituted, has afforded no practical solution of the constitutional difficulties attending the count of the electoral votes in disputed States, and that an exigency again arisii g like that of 1876 will surely lead to revolution; that the appointment of the Electoral Coitimission was wholly beyond and outside of the constitution, and its 'determination ought to have no legal force or effect; that the appointing of Judges of the Supreme Court upon such political formation had done great harm to the cause of justice by impairing the reverence that the people have always justly had for the integrity of the decision of that court of causes between party and party, and iu undermining the popular estimate of the stern impartiality of the court, that in all questions it will do equal and exact justice under the law to every citizen, and in view of its ill-success the experiment ought never to be tried again. The result has shown that it is against public policy, and tends to bring the elements of corruption into political methods of action, to send semi-official partisans ot large political influence on one side or the other, or both, into States for the purpose of controlling or advising either in regard to how its electors shall vote, or to advise as to the manner in which the votes of’ States shall be returned and counted; that the counting-in of Hayes was obtained by a series of gross and unjustifiable irregularities and frauds, which cannot be too strongly condemned and reprobated; that, if any title to the Governorship of Louisiana resulted from the late election in that State to any one, it was to Gov. Packard, who was legally elected, duly qualified ana inaugurated, ’and had the fight to the support of the General Government against domestic violence and insurrection, by which the State and himself were equally deprived cf their just political rights; that the act of Hayes, as President of the United States, in appointing and sending the MacVeagh Commission down to Louisiana for the purpose, and the instruction to act under which it was sent was an act wholly unauthorized by the constitution, and not within the power or scope of the Executive, and especially reprehensible, as its purpose and motive was to carry out a corrupt political arrangement, agreement, and compact on his part made by his friends, with his knowledge ana acquiescence and consent, the fruits of which he is still enjoying without right and against law; that there neither is nor ought to be any indefeasable title to any executive office which cannot be reached, re examined. and decided by proper proceedings authorized by Congress, to be taken and heard ultimately before the Supreme Judicial Court