The New York Herald Newspaper, February 6, 1877, Page 4

4 Stato of New York as to tho eligibility of a judge (say of the Court of Appeals) jo that caso a similar = sort of — inquiry might be opened in rogard to 000 persons, which 400, 48 but one.’ the number of electors; and in senting this ‘raw head au y bones”? which is to frighten this court and the whole country from its propriety, we might ern. that, in investigating the Tight of each of those 400,000 electors, it would take it 400,000 years, which would be a very long period for any court of justice to be engaged im trying a singlo cuse, (Laughter.) Now, the answer to all that 18 as: simple as can be imagined, The objection you perceive applies as much to the ordinary writs of quo Warranto in regard to. ordinary officers as it does to this inquiry if it should take place before Congress, for no court or set of courts could ever conduct, within the compass of any human lifetime, the investigation which might be necessary in determining the clam of a single officer. Therefore this argumentum ad inconvenientiam 13 as fatal to the gen proceedure of courts of justice in actions of quo warranto as it 1s to the proceeding here suggested. But, if the learned commission please, the investigation that may be allowed to take piace betore either house of Congress, or before commission appointed by them, would be govern by the same principles of general Fylde that apply to the doctrine of proceeding ¥ quo Warrauto, and one of those principles is that no man has aright to the writ of quo warranto as of course, or because he shows an apparent utle. It has always been a matter of discretion. Numerous cases are cited here on the other side to show that it has been always treated asa matter of discretion, 1t is In the power of the supreme tribunal, acting in the name and majesty of the peopic, when applied to for a@ writ of quo warranto to aliow it or not, a3 under all tho circumstances mi be’ thought most consistent with the pu lic interest, the ends of justice and the Convenionco of society, and by consequence this ex- panded inquiry can never take place on a writ of quo wurranto, It never would be allowed, No court would ever permit the writ to issue, and never docs 50 with- out a statement of the poinis intended to be made, And, if it were necessary in allowing the writ, the court would lay a restraint on Ube party as to what point in question he must make, so that, im all inves- judicial or otherwise, as to the right of a individual to hold “oF exercise a it 1s in the discretion of the day how far they will go, and it is In your discretion, as it would be in the discrotion of either House of Congress, acting tor its own advi and direction, as to the President and Vice President, jo determine whether it would conseot to permit an intolerable investigation of that description. So much for tho argunentum ad inconvenientiam, It has no application. There never would be tound a necessity for it. Standing on the ancient practices of the law, the authority which might be called upon to snstisute fu investigation would iook at the difleulty presented, and say, under the influence of a due regard to the argunentum ad inconvenientiam:—"Tbus far you may go; no further shall you go.” ‘THE POWRKS OF RACH HOUSE. Now in regard to the legal question presented, as to what powers cach house of Congress had under exist- ing laws, and what powers, consequently, this Commis- sion can exercise, we say, as the learned manager of the House stated in’ opening this case, that there is no technical legal limit or barrier to it, but that you exercise the same high power of the govern- ment that has always been exercised im such ques- tions, even in the courts of common iw, to which application is made to obtain the ‘writ of quo warranto; you exercise the samme dis cretion, and you ‘limit the inquiry (when the point arises) Within those limits that ure ‘prescribed by no- cessity und convenience. This is our view, stated as fuily as it is ip our power to state it in the brief time I ain permitted to occupy the attention of your honors, We say that there is no limit to the power of investigation for the purpose of renching the ends of Justice, except such adue regard tor public conven- lence and the interests of public justice and of societ at large may inpose in the exercise of that discretionary authority, What ts our con- dition aud the condition of all cases of this kind? ‘There 1s no judicial court in the United States clotnea with authority to deal with the premises. We assert that without stopping to cite books nad to prove it to you negatively, It scems to be conceded that if such a power might have been created it has remained dormant and has not been exercised, and consequently we are told that here we stand in the second century of this repnbiie’s existence, in such a condition that there 1s no possible remedy against the most palpable fraud and forgery that can be perpetrated, or against any outragcous acts in violation of the rights of the people of tho respective States and of the whole Union. Weare told that there is no remedy; shat Congress must sit by blindly and silently and per- mit an alien to be counted into office as President of the United States; must sit by and permit a set of votes plainly and palpably fraudulent (given by indi- viduals not only disqualified for want of having been chosen by the citizens, but being themselves absolutely disqualified by the constitution from acting in the office or from casting the vote) to be counted, and must permit the usurpation contemplated to take place “merely because bur wise fathers (one would think that the compliment was intended as a sarcasm) had 80 chosen to constitute the government which they created that injustice, however flagitious, might be perpetrated in open day without the possibility of having any remedy or of even uttering decorously a complaint. This, we humbly submit, cannot be the constitution and the law. Reason forbids It. All wols, however solemn, however sacred, from whatever quarter coming, by whatever body perpetrated are liable to review in some manner, in some judicial or other tribunal, so that fraud and falsehood may shrink bashed and dofeated, and may fail in the attempt to trample on the right, It scoms to be virtually con- ceded here that the Governor's certificate 1s not cou- elusive. 1 have not time to gay much about tuat, It 1s not required by the constitution, 1t is only required by un uct of Congress, The Governor caunot be com- pelled to givo it Many circumstances may prevent his giving it, and he may havo given it under tircumstances of viainly fiagitious falsehood, without any election, without any proceeding had to sanction it, He may have given ‘his certificate to his four hittie boys and constituted them an electo- Tal college, and the yote which they gave, pursuant to his bidding and by force of bis certificate, would be- come absolutely conclusive and binding on all the an- thorities of the United States who bad any power to act m the premises, I submit to Your Honors that that is not so, und I beg you to turn (when you come to cousider this mutter) to the citation of Armistead’s case in Mr. Green’s briet (15 Peters, 694), where the Supreme Court, spenking by the voice ‘of Judge Story, pro- nounced all transactions of every description, however halo for fraud and capable of being re- aso of the State of Michigan against uk (33d New York Reports, page 27), st solemn judgment the Pho your Honors will tind that the of avy Court may be overhauled and reviewed, and be shown to have been procured by a trick, 0 decepiion or a falsehood, and may be completely reversed and defeated, The inquiry, then, is How far are we to’go. in this case? The Florida Jawa, to which you have been referred, show that it may not be necessary to go farther (and we have as- seried that it will not be necessary to yo further) than to make a collection of the unlawiul extra jurisdic- tionalacts of the Canvassing Board. You may not, when you come to look at this law, which Is containe in a little document placed before you, cobsider that there 18 any such sanctity attending tho action of this State Bourd as is supposed, Tho law is that y such returns (the county returns) shall be show ) irregiiar, (aie or fraudalent to determine the true vote of any ror number, they shall so certify, ant shall in- ch return in their determination and declaration, Secratary of State shail preserve and file in his turns, together with such other documents pers as may have been before the Board of Can- vassers, one of whieh will be the certificate of their action rejecting those returns, law itself provides for and contemplates an in- igation of the action of the Board of State Can- vassers. Turning back to the law in relation to the isoard of County Canvassers you may find that neither of these bodies has any power whatever except simply to compute and return the vote as received, Su the case as W the primary Board of Cauvasse! the second Board of Canvassers and the and ultimate ard of very limitea © exercised only in regard to one single county. They rejected some little fragments o1 Ubree other counties, Vut did not exercise the power of rejecting the whole of these returns, which was the only power that thoy possessed. In rogard to the one single county they seom to have acted by some possibility within the limits of their power and authority. {i inight bo Bupposed that they did so, but we propose to slow thet they did no. We will siow tt by their own certificate, which the law compels them to fill and’ to place — along — with the counts which they made, and which {rom a short, te the mons trief and simple inquiry will demon Girosity of the deed which we claim that the quo warranto is perceive by looking at that same statute to which w have referred, tat unless the electors are St. vilicers this Canvassing Board haa whatever to deal with the you would be called upon to disre Which they made, aud to look at the county returns, which the law doos in terms muihorize to bo made tn rejerence to Presidentin! electors, ag well as to State oflicers, Well, if the electors are State oilicers cer tainly they were subject to correction by tho State if there Was any means or contrivance by which Ui be corrected at ali, and the familar, ordinary, course of proceedings by quo warranto wasc' tn due season, before they had actually cast Uh and their authority was determined to be utterly void and amnuiled, and that, too, long before their vote had reached the seat of government or could possibly have been subjectto count If they are not state officers then we have done with the canvass of the State Board 4 have only to look (in case you pass by the Gov- nor’s cortilicate) to the NEXT ELEMENT OF PROOF, and that js the whole set of county returns, which, be- Wo ° no authority subject, wnd ig footed up, would show the result to be as we cl (bat the Governor's certificate was utterly false. vequi legislation bas been presented pre tho How d a subsequent investigation tor rpose of arecanvass has been or will be jaid re the flouse. Indeed, it is already belore ths com- mission in the original document opened the President of the Senate. We clam that on thes jurther proofs a8 may be offered to you (subject only to the restraint which I have reierred to and wh you may exercise in your decision) you bave the night to mvestigate this matter and to determine two things: — Fir Wh ther the Hayes electoral vote is vatia, The fival decision at which you may arrive may reject sitber or may reject both, Thoy are not invoi ly the same questior rily. Different questious may possibly apply, and vote for Mr, Hayes may be pronounced tuvalid and tho vote tor Mr. Tiiden equally 8 have not time to discuss more tally the question as to settling the Tilden voto in case the Hayes vote may be rejected. In the little tine iett to me I have hardly an opportunity of saying « word ip regard woh! which is the main felianco 0! the other side, that ig the doctrine of officer de facto, will | d the canvass | principles and on these proofs and such | The Presiding Justice—You have 35 minutes left. though contrary to my intentions, that | may have exhausted my time unnecessarily, 1 have no desire, however, to ask for any more time, for I feel that any powers which I possess are fully taxed in filing up (he time allowed me, brief though it be. Now, as to this doctrine of AX OFFICER DR FACTO. What is that? The best definition of an officor de facto waich T have fallen in with is that given by Lord Ellepborough in the case of the King va, The Corpora- tion of Bediord, Sevel (C. East, 368). An oflicer de facto, ho says, 18 One who bas the reputation of being ‘the officer he seems to be, and yet is not a good officer in point of law, He is one who has clothed bimeelt with the reputation of being an officer, In relation to that Individual, that per. son, the law, with its wise conservatism, has declared that during the period when the person pretending title to the office was in apparent possession of all the powers and functions and exercised the dutics of it his acts as respects persons who, in the ordinary course of things, were obliged to recognize him and to act under and in conformity with his powers, shail be esteemed valid, ‘That individuals must not be deceived by that speci of disorder or temporary insurrection which has broks yh upon the functions of government. [tis daty of individuals, aud they are now under the necessity also, for their own business purposes, if there were these existing authorities, having this color of right, and if these are the only authorities to whic they can refer, to reler to them, and in that action of theirs as a reward for their humble obedience and respect for order, regularity and the apparent law they are held to be entitled to protection, and in all forms, ways and places they are ' protected. That that to the precise relation in respect to this class of officers 1 would tuke leave to prove by referring to Green va, Bunker, 23d 1, 603, where there is a very able opinion’ written by one of the most elaborate investi- gators of legal authority that I have ever known NEW YORK Yesterday’s Proceedings of the Louisiana Investigation, MADDOX REFUTED. Explanation of the Letter to Senator West. “NO VERNON RETURNS TO 8URN.” Cross-Examination by Mr. Dudley Field. THE WITNESS GREATLY EXCITED. Strange Contradictions and or heard of, Judge Cullom, formerly of j the State of New York, He examined the authorities and what he says is that tho cases to far, ys, ‘that the cases have gone a good ways, but they have stopped with preventing mischief to such as confided in the officers who were | acting withont rignt.”? That is the sum of the author- itiew and of the principle. Now what is the proposition here contended for? That these officers, having acted under color of right and baying completely exercised and perfected the function with which they appear (it 48 said) to be charged, and with which, if they wero duly elected, they. were charged, any subsequent at- temipt to set !t aside would be contrary to that princi- ple, contrary to convenience and mischievous to s0- ciety. Now, is that so? — Is not that principle of ne- cessity confined te acts affecting private persons? 18 it not of necessity confined to cases where the act of the officer de facto is consummated and perfected in some manner before it 1a ascertained that he is not entitled to his office and. he is ousted? Are the bank notes of a bank not having authority to issue them, although signed and pertect, and finished, and put in the bands of an agent, valid and effectual } under this principle until, some person has con- fided. in. them, and bak received them, and beon thus tmisied by the —appearauco of right with which the bank had improperly clothed itself, Now, we maintain that neither the public good nor the protection of men from deception nor any rule of convenience or policy requires the allowance of pre- tended electors, whose title, on investigation by com- potent authorities, before the votes have been opened and counted hag been ascertained to be groundless. + FE PACTS OF THK CASK. Referring to the facts of the case what do we find? These four gentiemen sit down with a false Governor's certificate, or a sham certificate from # Board of State Canvassers, and they of their own authority, certify- ing their acts themselves, cast four votes in a given direction, put them in a packet and send it to an officer who cannot look at it until the ume of its presentation for the purpose of being considered und counted, Belore that time arrived at which th act of theirs could deceive anybody, could have any opposition, could take elfect, coute get into such acondition that its preservation and maintenance were necessary for the cause of public justice or private right, their lack Of title was ascertained; by a solemn writ of quo war- ranto it was determined that they were usurpers; that they had no right to the office and that their acts were void. 1g there any such principle ag that the im- choate, partial action of an officer de facto shall be carried forward and go to its perfection by the ace ceptance of the act as 4 due and valid act after the in- validity of what officers claim has been established, Whethor we repose on the quo warranto under Your Honors allowance, or repose on proot which may bo here offered, admitted and passed upon by Your Hon- ors for the purpose of showing the utter invalidity of those gentlemon’s claims to the offices of clectors, or in whatever shapo this matter 1s preseuted or carried forward, the act of theso oflicers de facto ails to have reached the point where it can have or take any elfect, or can decelve or mislead anybody, and it is shown and established by gompetent means to be an act of those who had no Authority to perform it. The position of the thing 1s very striking in that singlo aspect which the other side has assumed, Theact of an undoubted, indis- puted, convicted usurper claimed to ve received and to have an effect, which it has o3 yet never had, because at the time they perfected the’ initiatory und preliminary ‘step which was to render it effectual at last, they had been shown to have been utterly without mght to their ollico, It may be said that this sharpened arrow, aimed at the heart of thé nation, aimed lor the purpose of establishing falsehood, seating an ursurper, tram; ling down the vote of the State and of the nation, was fairly placed in the bow of the ursurper, that adequate force and strength was given to it to carry it to the heart which was to be wounded and etung to aenth by it, @but it cannot be successtul if a quo warranto is eifectnal, or if the shield is interposed between the wrong doer and the bosom of the nation, by which this arrow, steeped in the guilt of fraud, destined to the perpetration of in- justice and the consummation of atrocious untruth, has been diverted and divested of all its powers. In this connection, under this strango head of a claim to have ade facto President by force of a vote of de facto electors, 1 call your Honors’ attention to a single view of which this caso is susceptible. Now, although there may be an officer de facto, it seems to be in the nature of things that there caunot be an unlawiul, unauthorized tribunal or bedy do fucto acting without right. These persons could not act except by constituting, what has been well enough called an electoral college, of which they would be the members They undertook to consti- tute it It was an electoral college of their own wrongful claims and intrusive persons, and thus sought to create, by wrong and without one sinyle ele- ment of right, a lawiul electoral college, I usk Your Honors, for the purpose of showing that this distinc- tion 1s entitled to considerable weight, to reler to the cases of Hildreth’s heirs vs, Mclutyre, devisee 1, J. J, (Marshal's Kentucky reports, page 206), | when certain persons, ,being no doubt de facto ollicera, claimed that they bad cstablished a | de iucto court, and the determination ot the tact (which I submit to your Honors? consideration), was that there could not Le u de facto court, although there might be ade facto judge or a de facto ollicer, And we say by the sane reasoning that there could not be an uplawiul do facto electoral coliege, composed j of mere pretenders to that offlee, who had no right to it. In this connection you have exactly the case which was before the Court there, which, perhaps, exists in other State of this Union avout this time, You have the case of two distinct bodies existing at the samo time, one rightful and the other wrong- ful ‘1 mean formal bodies which were attempted to be created, The Tilden electors who, although they had not documentary evidence to establish their title, bad actually been elected. if our evidence is to be be- Heved, convened their Electoral College, periormed their ceremonies, Which the Constitution and laws of the United States enjoined upon them and which it was possible to periorm, failing only in this, that they did not obtain the certificaio of the Govs ernor, They constituted the college, ‘They | acted and they seut forward their vows, ‘Thus you have two rival bodies, acting, to be sure, at the Tight time, in the nght place, and prescribed by the laws beuring on the subject; two rival bodies, ove of Which was composed of rightlully and duiy elected, and the other which was compozed of persons who had no right, but only the mere color or pretence of right, Who were usurpers, as has been ascertalued in one form and Will be ascertained in any other that mnay be satisfactory to you if you will permit us to mtro- duce the evidence. Now, this is the actual condition of this case, Tne Constitution prescribes no form save such as las been complied with by the Tilden electors. ‘the law of Congress prescrives no forms which were uot com- plied with by the Tilden electors, save and except ouly that they could not obtain the Governor's certiticate, | and it is pretty much conceded, 1 think, that the Gov- ernor’s certificate 18 not absolutely Indispensable | and inay be gaiusaid = and contradicted, even if it had been given and was faise; so that in wis cage of rivalry between (hese two sets of electors it ap- | pears to me that we present the best legal title, That we have the moral right is the common sentiment of all mankind, It will be the Judgment ot posterity. There lives bot a man, 80 lar 1 know, on the face of this earth Who, baving the faculty took an honest man in the face and assert that the Hayes electors were truly jected, Aud the Whole question is, therefore, whether, in What has taken place, there has been such absence of form as is totully fatal to justice and be- youd the search of any curative process of any descrip tion whatever, | TUhink that L have observed as much as in any way neediul on the to what evidence is ad- conceive the portions which we have the effect of ene titling us to produce any evidence here | which eituer of the houses of Congress prosecuting | an investigation of thiz description might lawtuily re« ceive, aud that we are subject here only ax much ag we would be betore one of the houses of Congress, to the discretion to which I baye betore reterred, by which you can restrain us ws you can restrain the other parties from going into interminable and absurd inquiries. As to what is actually here the course of my urguwent has tended to, establish, aud has been intended to establish, and, if it has any vaiue, has established that’ each House of Congress | had jurisdiction of the matter—each of them at least’ of one section of it—and therefore that all evidence which according to the customs and usages of legislative bodies either House bas taken, and bas on 118 files, and will consent to send in bere, or hag sent in here, is already evidence in the case 80 far ag to be here to be read if it comes within the range of subjects aud ot matters of tact which Your Honors allow us to investigate. | After some eitations of law points by counsel on | both sides tne l’residing Justice announced that the commission would now (hull-past two) take a recess jor three-quarters ot an bour, aud that no other mat- ters would be taken up to-day im public session, Alter the recess the commission remained in secrot fossion about twenty minutes, and; after authorizing the announcement that there would be no public sex sion to-morrow, adjourned to moet at twelve o'clock | of blushing, could advanced Cross Purposes. [FRoM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT. } Wasuinaton, Feb, 5, 1877. The discovery made this afternoon that J, Madison Wells, ofthe Louisiana Returning Board, has been a sort of walking arsenal since bis arrival here, created something of a sensation among the members of tho committee to determine the powers, privileges and duties of tho House in the electoral contest. Orders have been given and measures taken to disarm Wells, who, it is said, has in the course of his life killed three men, and on probably less provocation Field and Knott given him during the — last When Wells was committed to prison the Capito the officers in charge of him noticed that two revolv- ers wero among his baggage, but no attempt was made to take them away from him, It seoms that he had these weapons on his person whilo under cross-examin- ation by Mr, Field this afternoon, a cross-examination 80 searching and severo that Wells was more than once aroused to the highest pitcn of passion. PROCREDINGS OF THK COMMITTER, Tho Committee on the Powers, Privileges and Duties ‘of the House in Counting tho Electoral Vote, met this morning. In consequence of the promised explana- tion of Governor Wells of the correspondence submit- ted by Maddox and of Littlefield’s testimony the com- mittee room was crowded with expeciant auditors. The programme of the procedure was slightly changed, however, inasmuch as Governor Wells was not put upon the stand as the first witness, as agreed upon on Saturday, but the first witness examined was G. Casanave, of the Returning Board, TESTIMONY OF CASANAVE, He testified that he had no knowledge of any altera- tion of the returns from Vernon parish, and had seen none on any paper laid before the Board; he had no acquaintance with Maddox, and had no knowledge of his having any conversation with Governor Wells in regard to the election; Governor Wolls never suggested to witness tu take any money or other valuable con- sideration to affect the result of the election; did not know about Maddox having any conversation on that subject with Wells; be had no knowledge of the re- turns of Precinct No, 2 trom Vernon parish bemg burned; had no knowledge of the result of the elec- tion until atter the returns had been canvassed. By Mr, Field—Is an undertaker by trade; was ap- pointed on the Board in 1873; there was a vacancy on the Board in 1875 and 1870, caused by tho resignation in 1875 of the democratic member; it was never filled; Dr. Kennedy’s name was suggested by a letter from members of the democratic party; does not know who Jaid the letter before the Board ; does not know whether this was dono belore or after the canvass commenced; the first meeting the Board had regarding the late elec- tion was on November 16 or 17; did not believe they began the canvass unul November 19 or 20; thinks the recotpt of the letter suggesting Dr. Ken nedy’s name was mentioned in the minutes (on lock. ing overa printed vopy of the minutes handed the witness by Mr Ficla he said he could not find uny mention of the letter); he did not know what Wells said when be presented the letter; does not know anything about Dr. Kennedy’s standing in New Orleans; he did not know asa lace that the reason why Kennedy was not elected was because the ropab- licun members of the Board did not want a democrat to watch them; did not think it partol his duty to propose Kennedy's election to fill the vacancy; tho visiting commitvees Were present at all the delibera- tions and imeectings of the Board except at the secret, sessions; in these the disputed questions were settledy the retarns couspiled und tho results dociared; wit- ness’ construction of the language of the reso- luuion of the Board inviting these commit. tees ‘to be present ut the Cunvansing, compiling and declaring the result of the returns;” was in conso- nanco With the action of the Board im excluding them from the secret sessions; bad no recollection of the United States Supervisor being relased permission to be present; in the secret sessions General Anderson and Mr. Kenner generally did the figuring; Mr. Ken- ner kept a memorandum of the secret sessions tor bimsel! and witness. He stated that, in rejecting any precinct or poll, they acted upon the evidence belore them; 18 positive that there were affidavits or a protest from the super. visor in the case of either West or Kast Baton Rouge, Witness stated that he was positive that affidavits were betore the Board in executive session, but he could not remember whether 500 or 10,000 precincts were thrown out, Q Asthe returns camo jn first, were the returns for the Hayes or tho Tilden electors? A. 1 really cannot remember. Q@ Had you any conversation, during the time the returns were canvassed, with anybody regarding the majority? A. With nobody in the world. Q. Aud you did not know anything about the result 0/ the election until alter tho canvass was completed? A. No, sir. Witness stated that they completed the canvass for Presidential electors ow December 6, but then cor- rected bimsell aud said that he did not remember the date; be believed it was in January; it Was about pine o’clock in the morning; ail four members were pres ent, and he thought the return was signed by all. Q Did you open the returns in secret xession? A, Yes—no; we had one paper in secret session—the what you inay call iv? T forgot the name; it was only one paper—the contabulated statement—the whole of or four than = Messrs. have week. in Q. In whose handwriting was this? A, In that of the Supervisor. ad What supervisor? A. The Supervisor of Elee- ions. Mr. Burchara—He means the consolidated statement, The Witness—fhat's it; that’s what | meant when I said contabulated; 1 meant consolidated. Q Whut has become of that paper? A, Ido not know what you mean by that, Q What was done wiih these statements? A. They were given back to the clerks, and tinady filed in We office of the Secretary of State, ‘The withess stated that be did not know any instanco fn which aflidavits regarding any returns came i utter these returns had been received, nor in which rewuras Were thrown out without any protests or aifidavite He remembered nothing about the returns from the parish of Ouachita, nor about a letter from the super- visor there transmitung Eiiga Pinksion’s testimony, and saying that be had received it wo late for tiling 1% with the other testimony accompanying his returas, THK VERNON RETURN, Mr, Casanave was interrogated concerning tho origival return from Vernon parish, and stated that he did not believe that the word ‘compiled,’ written on the same, was in Mr. Kenner’s bundwriting. (1b will be remembered that Kenner himseit testified that ho wrote tbat word on the return in question.) The word ‘compiled’? indicated that the returo wus passed upon, Q Look at the er marked ‘A’? and the biack lines opposite the parish of Vernon, and explam how it is that there are three precincts thrown out when the origival return had been accepted as correct? A. 1 know nothing at all about that. Q Well, that looks as if some fraud had been com- mitted, then, does it not? A. Yes, sir. Q Do you kuow who had to do with that fraud? A. Ido now Q. Now, look again at the original return and see whether you can tell where it bas been altered? A. 1 | cannot sco where it has, Look at the paper marked “B’’ and see how many votes were cast for the Hayes electors in Vernon parish, A. Iwo votes for six aud one voto for two of the electors. @ Now, look at the paper marked ‘C” and seo how on that, the final return, the vote stands? A, There are 170 votes for three and 108 votes lor the other electors, Q That shows another fraud, does it not? A. That paper shows a fraud. Mr. Burchard—You do not know anything about the correctness of the: ors’, A. L do nok Q. You never saw them betore? A, 1 have nok Mr. Lawrence—You don’t mean to say that « fraud was committed? A. No, sir; 1 know nothing about the mutter, @ Do you know anything abouts transfer “f votes ‘hoon to-morrow for consultation, in Vernon parish? A. 1 do now Discussion arose in regard to taken by the committee, when dion tothe testimony, oo far as wo have It, ‘hevuse of the comuslevec, but T'ahall ab: until we pave all of it. And 2 fon. nting the testimony ir. Lawrence said: + re i ebwcretad privileges of the tiouce, T think it nto ers a e 3 might we eatlto inguire inte’ the. powers aid privileges of the Committee. Hare. te coutnining a sten- her's report of t ct comm: to any testi {elouteide parties fer putitention. fand dolug so ts m yrose palpable violation of the rules governing committees. Mr. Fleld—Why, you have given access to members of the press to our meetings, have you not? Mr, Burcbard—Yes, to report what ¢! hear. oe Le aaa can’t they report every word, if they see fit nr. Lawrence—Does anybody know how this pam- phlet came to be printed? Several members of the committee—This is the first 1 have seen of it, At this point the committee deemed it advisable to bv a orivels conference and the room was accordingly el GOVERNOR WELLS’ TESTIMONT. When the doors were reopened Governor Weils, of the Returning Board, was put upon the stand and ex- amined by Judge Lawrence, ‘Mr, Lawrence handed to Governor Wells the brief note to Maddox of November 20 aud asked bim to state what led to the writing of this aote, Answer,—Bet ore answering this question I shouid like to ask the committee that a letter of about four written by Mr, Maddox himself, commendatory of bis conduct a3 an officer, and addressed to the Prosident of the United States and signed by me, be produced, because this note stands in connection with that, Mr, Lawrence then bauded the witness the letters written by the latter to Maddox, and the one to Sena- tor West, and requested him to make any explanation he might desire to make concerning them, At this point Mr. Maddox entered tbe room, and was asked to produce the letter referred to by Wells as being written he 8 Maddox bimsell, but denied having such a letter or having ever written such a one, Mr. Weils then said that he met with Maddox in thiscity about two or threo years ago; I did not meet him again until November 18, when he came to my room in New Orleans und told me that he was an agent of the gov- ernment and sent down there to look into the political situation; he asked me for my views; said that Le had had a good deal of conversation with persons of both parties; that the people were a good deal exasperated against me and agaist the Packard government and would not submit to its ruling if it wero sustained; I told him if that were so he ought to go at once to HERALD, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1877.—TRIPLE Washington and make a.corresponding report; on Mon- day morning, before tl eeting of the Board, bi to my olfico and said was going to Washington; I told him I was glad of it; he then laid down before me a long letter addressed to the President, and com. mendatory of his conduct as an officer, which bo re. quested me to sign, and did so; he then asked me to write a further er, giving a description of the condition of affairs; this 1 dectined to do, but told him | would give bim @ pote giving him the entree 1p Washington; this note did not satisty him, and then ! wrote the other letter of credentials; he then withdrew from the room, saying he was going that afternoon at five o'clock. The next morning Mr. Maddox entered my room, uod when I expressed my surprise at seeing him he said that he had not been ablo to get off tho afternoon previous, 1 then wrote tho letter to Senator West and gave it to him, saying that I had intended to send it by mail. DENIAL OF MADDOX’S TESTIMONY. Q. State what you said to Mr, Maddox about money to affect the decluration of the rosult of the election 10 Jayor of either the republicans or democrats? A. L never had any conversation with him upon the sub- ject, i The witness sald he wrote the letter while the room was fullof persons; Maddox then withdrew and wit- hegs saw no more of him until tho 7th of December, when he returned and said he was going up Red River; Maddox came back a day or two rward, and iinme- diately on entering the room told witness ho wanted to purchase a cetain plantation and make Louisiana his home; he asked witness to see the owner, a Mr. Horris, mm regard to prico, &c, ; witness had not seen Mad- dox from that time until his (witness’) arrival here. Q. Stato what, if anything, you said to Mr, Maddox in relation to procuring money or anything else of value for you or other members of the Roturniug Bourd of Louisiana, tn order to declare the result of the election either in favor of the republican candi- dates or the democratic candidates? A, 1 had no con- versation with Mr. Maddox upon that subject; none whatever. Q. Did he say anything to you? Witness—In regard to it? Q In regard to procuring money or anything of yalue for you or any member of the Board? a. Ho aid not, sir, Q. Did you say to him in any form or intimate in any form that you desired him to procure money or anything of valuo for you or for any member of the Boarat A. I did not, sir. Q Did he gay anything about the democrats having or intending to use money to procure a decturation of the result of the election? A. He did not, sir; [ will tell you that when It comos up, aud I will give it trom a very responsible source—a man who is worth $1,500, 000, Q. State if he said anything about a desire to be transierred to New Orleans as an agent of tho Treas- ury Department? A, That was his intention, sir; he said he desired to do go, but aid uot fx a time for his change of position from nere to New Orleans, @ Whatdid he say, if anything, as to his object in procuring theso first two lettors about which you have testifieay A. To put the real condition of the senti- ments of the people of Louisiana in possession of the President. Q You have said that ho wrote a long letter and re- quested you to sign it? A. Yes, sir, Q State whether you signed it, and, if so, what you did with wf A. I signed the ter, and Mr, Maddox folded tt up, put it in an envelope and took the letter its #uperecmption was m his own handWrit- ing; he addressed it to’ the President himself; I have never seen the lotter; Mr. Maddox read it to me. Q What was the substance and object of it, if you can state? A, The substance and object ol the let ter— Mr. Field—The substance and object are two differ. ent things. "Phe witness—I cannot tell the object; I will tell you the substance; the substance was cominendatory as a public officer, By Mr, Lawrence—Did he state what his object was? A. Ho then stated his object was, if ha was favor- ably received and things were all right, that he would try to yet himself trunsterred from Washington to New Orleans. Q Did he state why he desired to bo so transferred? A. I don’t think be did, sir. '@ Aro you acquainted with G, M. Calvort, No. 170 Custom House street, New Orleans? A. I am, sit. ‘Q. What relativn, if any, does he now or did he at apy time during the last year sustain toward you! A, Well, sir, in the election ot 1876 Mr, Calvert aided mo in vhe parish of Rapides in getting the people to poll- ing places; Mr. Calvert himself 18 a democrat and voted for Mr, Tilden and Mr. Hendrie! nd for Mr. Nicholls and Mr. Wiltz, bat he voted the parish ticket for the republican party. MORK TRUEGRAMS. Q. Hero isa telegram taken from the testimony of Mr. Pickett: ©, M. Catvert, D Tenns : Hold. Will telegraph you Monday evening. cael JOSUPH HANCOCK. Q. Did you over sco that original telegram? A. I never did, Q. Did you ever hear of it until it was disclosed in the testimony here’ A, 1 never did. Q Did you have any conversation with Mr. Calvert in relation toitY A. 1 never did. Q. Did you bave any couvorsation with him on the aubject of procuring money? A. No, sir. ™ Q. Did he uct in any capacity as your friend to pro- cure money or otber thing of value? A, He did not, sir. Fi Q. Did you have any arrangoment or understanding with bim that Mr, Maadox should telegraph to him tor for you, elther over his own name or over the name of Joseph Hancock or any other name? A, Mr, Maddox In leaving tny office, after writing this note to Mr, West, stated 1! his Business was reeeived or he was re- ceived properly at Washington that he would telegraph me back that {t waa ail right; 1 statea to Mr. Maddox that | wanted (the Board was then just commencing its labor) | wanted no communication by telograph or anything else during the meetings and the operations ot the Board; | received no telegrams whatever; Mr. Calvert, | think, received a telegram from Mr. Maddox that all was right, implying that his application— Mr. Field—Do not say what was implied, because 1 think we can do that as well as you. ‘The witness—Very well, sir. By Mr, Lawrence—Did you see tho telegram? A. I did not. @ What was tho arrangement with Mr. Maddox about telegrapbing that “all was right??? A. If be was success{ul in bis moves ip regard to going to the city of New Orleans 48 a government officer. @ Did you have any arrangement with Mr. Calvert that he was to deliver any telegram to you? A. None, sir, none; nothing more than to tell me the result of Mr. Maduox’s telegram, tha: te might receive. NEVER KNEW PICKETT. : 170 Custom House streot, Now Or- Q. Did you have any knowledge—was there apy cor- respondence or conference with Mr. Pickett in relation yocuring money’ A. 1 never knew Mr. Pickett— him—never heard of him until I saw bis testimony ; I didn’t know that there was a man by that nano In existence. @ After Maddox returned to New Orleans did he give you any information that he had been in confer- ence or correspondence with anybody in relation to procuring money to affect the result of the eiection? A. He did not, sir, Q Did be give you any information that he made any effort to procure money for you or for any mem- ber of the Board? A. Ho did not, str. Q Did you have any knowledge that Mr, Pickett or Mr. Maddox was telographing or corresponding on that gubject? A. Not at all, sir; not the slightest in the world. Q. Who is Colonel F. , Zacharle, of Now Orleans? A. Ho ig a lawyer there, sir, Q. A domocrat or republican? A, He is a democrat, sir. Q. Did you have any information of any telegram sent to him by Mr. Picket? A, None, sir, whatever, Q Here is a telegram— Wasi Colonel F. ©. 4 A double Ki you might trust por- son E wrote nbout, JOHN T. PICKETT. Did you ever see or hear ot that telegram until it was produced in testimony before this committee? A. 1 nover did, sit. Q. Here is u telegram: Joseru HANCOCK, 137 Bienville street, New Orton pores i erento en, cate ae tng ry e ot value, for or say other member of the Return. i; eee ever did, air, How many ttmes had you seen Mr. Maddox before you wrote these two letters that kave been put in evi- devee? A. 1 saw Mr. Maddox on Saturday evenil tho 18tb ae of Bow ber; I left my piantation op ths 12th of vember, and arrived in New Orlean! on the even of the 15th or the morning of the 16th; I appeared at ind was sworn in court ice the morning of the 17th; the Hoard met, but the rooms were small, and we adjourned over to meet on Saturday, the 18th; we met on the 18th, and passed resolutions, iptroduced by Mr, Anderson, of the gentiemen who had gone there, on eae! witness canvassing of the vote; adjourned about three o’clock in the afternoon, and that evening, aft returning from my dinner, where 1 generally took my meals at the City Hotel, some eight or ten blocks off trom where my room was; Mr. Maddox came tn, and that, as I said belore, was the first time I bad seen him 1 three years, and I did not see bim again until Monday, the 20th, when I wrote these letters, with the exception of the letter to Sena- tor West, which ig dated the 21st, and was written on Tuesday; | intended to have sent that letter by mail; but, Mr, Maddox. in my office, ani 1 remarked that asi |, that I thought he had gone, but that 1 was glad he was there and would write the letter to send by him, Q How long bad you been acquainted with Mr. Maddox? A. I thing my first acquaintance with him was about 1847; he was a soldier tu the Mexican War, and was disbanded J think; and baving 9 large con- nection of peopic living w Rapides be remained there and married there; | uhink it was 1 1847 or 1848, Q When Maddox returned to New Orleans from Washington did ne tell you that he had not delivered the letter which you addressed to Senator West? A. He did not, sir. ‘ Q Did you express to him at any timo your satis- bea that he bad not delivered the letter? A, 1 did not, sir. Q. Did he say anything about what ho had done with the letter to Senator West, or did you inquire of him? A, 1 did not inquire; I presumed thas it was delivered. SARBATH EXERCISES. Q. Did you have any conversation with Maddox tho evening before these two letters of November 20 wore written? A. 1 did not, sir; that was Sunday, 19th; Saturday, 18th, alter the adjournmont of tho. board, 1 went to dinner; | mot a gentiemun at tho stairway as Iwas gong into my dinner; he said to mo that ho wanted have a conference with mo; that we were both old citizens of the State, and he boped that Louisi- anians would work together, and when could be bat 2 interview; | stated to him that | was very busy and cn- gaged with the Board and | could not fix a time; that altercoon it was impossible for me to do so and L therelore could not say when 1 could give bim this interview; says he, ‘Can't you come to my ollice to-morrow (which was Sunday) at ten o’clock ?”* I told bin tL hadan engagement to go out to the park (which is some two or three miles from the city) and dine with a friend; that I did not know whether | could do {¢ genot, but | presumed [ might; that | would vot leadmy room till about twelve or one o'clock \o go out to dinner, **weil,’’ says he **won’t you come at ten o'clock ? that will give you ample time, and you can then fill your engagement Sunda: evening;’’ I told him, ‘Certainly, sir, 1 will go; I will meet you at your office’? On Sunday morning, afver taking my breakfast at ten o’clock, I repaired to the genticman’s office and had a conference with him until about noon, when I retired to my room and there met the carriage of the gentleman, which I en- tered, was driven off, spent the day and did not return di sent his t to Calvert dp regard to hs own affairs that vt was all right; it was all right I supposed. Q. Wero you acquainted with the Adjutant Genoral of Louidiana? A. Mr. Jack Wharton? Yes. A. Yes, sir; I know him very well, Q. Did he ever tell you be had possession of those letiers or any of them’? A. He never did, sir. @ Did you have any knowledge that he had them? A. I never bud, sir; I was frequently in she room where he lod aoe inquiry as to what had become of I never did, sir, Q Did you ever have any conversation ‘ith Senator West in relation to the uso of money to affect the re- sult of the election? A. I never did, sir, Q Or with regard to obtaining mot or any member of tho Board? A. 1 RETURNS OV VERNON PARISH. @ Were any of the returns from Vernon parish burned 1m your presence or with your knowledge? A. With duo regard to the committee and to the Chair. man of the committee | will state that I am unwilling to be catechised upon ig ol the results of the election, with the exception of Vornon parish, until 1 have been discharged of the contempt charged upon me be- fore the House aud my liberties as an American free- man are allowed mo, 1 will on, in ordor to B mel before the committce everything in relation to Vernon parish that] know, but outs of that, in cTegard to the election, I must decline most respect. fully until the punishment which I have been adjudged shall have beep carried out or I shall have been re- Neved of it, Now, sir, 1 am ready to answer your question. Q. You may state whether polls 2 and 9 or any othor polls from Vernon parish were burned or other+ wise destroyed in your presence or with your knowl. ledgo? A. ‘None, sir, whatever; and the man who has sworn to it is an unmitigated har, Pardon, gentle. men, I don’t mean to offend the feelings of the com. mittee, but the outrage upon my rights excites m and, as a matter of course, it brings trom me langua: which, perhaps, I ought not to use before thia body. Q Did you make aay ees or give any direction for the destruction in any form of any paper returned to tho board? A. I nover did, sir, a 2 Or any paper relating to the election? A. I never 1d, gir. Q Did you have any knowledge of the destruction of any? A. [did not; I will make a statement now 1a connection with that matier; the compiled returns by the Supervisor of Registration of the parish of Vernon was transmitted, asingle sheet, to the Returning Board by mail, a ‘route 400 «mies; it was opened im the presence of the gentlemen who werd there from the North for the prepons of witnessing the count; there was but a single paper in that return, the compiled statement from the Supervisor of Registration; there was a goneral protest by all of ¢ Hayes electors, and 1 think othor protests, but ter was ho poll list or tally sheet from Vernon; thi were no such documents returned, and, vherotore, none to be burned, Mr. Lawrence here called the attention of the wit- ness to the Senate document containing the letter of Senator Sherman to the President, and the accompany: ing proceedings of the Returning Boards Grpeciel | the statement that there was no tally sheet receiver from Vernon parish, In response to further questions the witness testi: fled:—Iam not acquainted with Littledeld; L never saw him until the 20th of November; I did not know his name for a week after be was aclerk for the Board: 1 never buve spoken twelve words to him in’my life; never requested or directed bim to make an alteration in the return from Vernon parish or any other, and for yourself did, until ten o'clock at night; I bad no conversation with Maddox from Saturday until Monday, Q Did Fe see him or the evening of the 19th at all? A. fdid uot; L could aot have seen hin; 1 was three miles from the city. Q When he came to your office on the morning of the 20th, had you written either of these letters? A, Not one, sit; I wrote them right thero; the room was filled with gontiomen; { had but an hour or two to stay; | hadto repair to the office tocommence our labora at about ton or half-past ten, and I had only {rom about balf-after eight until that timo to transact my office business, and | sat down and wrete this letter. ‘THR MILLION DOLLARS. Q Did-you say to bin that you wanted a million dollars or any other sum of money? A. No, sir, I did not Q Did you request that Maddox should proceed to Washington? A. I did not, He suggested it himself. and | told him I thought it was his duty as an officer to apprise the government of what ho believed to ba the condition of things there; that I (elt myself that things were not altogetber right from what 1 saw and from my tatercourse with people, Q Didyou say to him that you wanted to serve your party, but did uot want, to run the risk unless you were ‘compensated tor it, or uny language of that im- ey A. No, sir; I bave been a Union man from 849 to the present time; I passed through the whole war, persecuted as a Union man; I never flinched from my position when | was surrounded with the Confed- erate soldiers who were pursuing me for my lifo, and I certainly would not tell Mr. Maddox to procure a sum of money ior me to stand firm to the principles which I had eutertained bejore the commencement of the rebellion, @ Did you say to him that the vote was “very heavy” for youto handle? A. I did not, str. Q ‘That if’ st had been smaller you might have ac- complished the desired result by throwing out New Orleans? A, I aid not, si THE VOTH OF NRW ORLEANS. Q Was any part of the vote of New Orleans thrown out? A, Notto my knowledge; not by action of the Board; if tt was it must have been by other parties. Q. Was there auy proposition before the Board to throw out New Orleans? A, Yes, sir, There wasa proposition, but it was a propgsition in 4 protest of the counting of the nuturalized votes, and 1 gave the attorneys on each side an boar to discuss the question, and after the discussion I concluded, or the Board con- cluded, that they had not power to do it, Q. Was there any proposition to throw out the en- tire vote of the city of New Orieal A. None, sir. Q Did you say to Mr. Maddox that he should come ‘on to Washington and see influential men and get pro- tection and the money you wanted, or anything of similar import? A. No, sir; 1 merely said tu Mr. Maddox that [ would be very glad if he would make a statement of the condition of things when he got there, and he said that was his object and he intended to do'so; that he had been sent down lor that purpose. Q On the 20th of November had these gentlemen who represented the repablican and democratic par- ties from the North, Seuator Sherman and others on one side—— A. (Interrupting). they were thore; they must have arrived about the Thursday prior to that, which would have been about the 15th or 16th and, a8 1 have stated, on Saturday resolutions wero offered to permit these gentlemen to come betore the Board, and letters were directed to them apprising them of the action of the Board in regard thereto, DEMOCKATS USING MONKY. Q. Had you any facts to induce you to suppose that democrats intended to use money in procuring testi- mony and coungel and other things to be usea betore the Board with a view to present the democratic sido of the question as strongly as possible? A, That had Deen done; they were there, sir, using it; they appeared belore the Bourd, @ Do you know whether money was expended in employing counsel and procuring testimony? A. Let me wuderstand your question, Does that apply to any of the gentlemen who were there or the attorneys in the city ? Q To the atorneys in the city. A. Ido not know the workings of the democratic party of the city of New Orleans in regard to these things, but 1 presume money-— Mr. Field (interrupting)—I beg you will not say what you presume. ‘Mr. Lawrenco—State how it was commonly re- ported, A. It was generally believed that money was there. ri Q. It was generally believed on or prior to the 20th of November that the demoerats were using money in the employment of counsel and procuring ot testimony, with a view to the presentation of the democratic side of the question as strongiy as possible to the Board? A. | prosume so, sir, Q. State whether in consequence of that the ro- publicans also employed counsel and expended money iu procuring testimony? A. They did, sir, J will qualify that by stating that the attorney for the Board, Mr. John Ray, was feed (he hus not got his money yet, but ho has the promise of It) to attend to the interests of the republican party. hat the other attorneys barged or whether they charged anything, I do not know. Q. There were lawyers employed on both sides? A. On both sides. Q. And both sides took testimony? A. Yes, sir; both sides took testimony. Q Ail of which required the expenditure of money? ‘Yes, sir; necessarily so, @ And you deemea it important that the leading republicans in Washington should understand the sit- uation A. Yes, si Q@ Weill, was there any discussion on any form be- tween you and Maddox in relation to a resignation of any of the republican members of the Boura? A, None, gir. Q, Neither ag a moans of enabling the democrats to get in aod control the Board or otherwise? A. No, air. A THE WORD “HOLD,"? Q. Did you have any understanding with Mr, Mad- dox, prior to the time be left New Orleans, as to what the word “hold” should mean if he should telegraph that to New Orleans to anybody’ A. Nota syllable, air, Q Were you furnished with, or did you know of the existence of any cypher by which telograpning was to vegone? A. No, sir, Did you say wo Mr. Maddox that you wanted at least $200,000 for yourself, and a similar sum tor Mr. Anderson? A. None, sir. @ And asmalier amount for the “niggers”? A. None, sir; I never use the word “nigger” to the gentlemen who are with me on the Board; | do not consider them niggers; they are colored people, und they are gon- fe you been in the habit of using that expr sion, “niggers”? A. No, sir; 1 haye not since tbe war; L used to use it when I owned ‘them, but they are now citizens, and [ treat them as such, Q. Did Maddox say to you in New Orleans or clse- where that the negotiations im New York had tailed? A, He did not, sir, Q Did he say anything to you upon the subject of the negotiations? “A. Not at all, sir; he never did. Q. Did you say to Mr, Maddox at noon of the 6th of December, or about that time, that the majority for the Hayes electors would be about 1,200 or 1,800? A. | have no recollection of any conve jon with Mr, Maddox on that subject either betore or after the 6th, but I[ will stare this, that on the evening of the Sih the Board had arrived at its conclusion and on the morning of the Och the promulgations of the election were made in the public papers of New Orieans and the result of the elvction could have been known to Mr, Maddox oo the 6th in the morning, and would have been known ‘irod, Damn my interests, Think of the 40,000,000 of people, JOUN 7. PICKETT, Did you know that sach a telogram as that was sent to Mr. Maddox under the name of “Joseph Hancock’? of any other person until it was produced in evidence here? A, Never heard of it @, Did you ever request Mr, Maddox or any to bim as having been 3,400 or 3,600 for Mr. Hayes, Q Did you have akey to any cipher, so that you Might understand despatches that should be sent to you by Mr, Maddox or anv other person? A. 1 did bot, sir, Q. Did you have any conversation with Maddox in never had any convergation with him about bis dutics as clork. + The committee then took a recess, OROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR, FIRED, The witness was subjected to a very severe cross examination by Mr, David Dudley Field. It wae mainly directed to an explanation of the mean- ing ‘of quoted passages from the letter of Senator West. Mr Field also called atten. tion to the paper purporung to be the original return from tho parish of Vernon, but hr professed to be unable to identify it or to discover that any change had been made in the figures. On being shown the transposition of 178 votes from the democratic to tl republican side, he admitted that it must have been done for a Iraudulent pu poso, but denied that he had any _ knowledge ‘as to how or where or when it was done. He admitted that Caivert, to whom Maddox telegraphed, was an old and intimate friend of his and bad, while in New Or- Jeans, occupied @ room in the same house with him, The cross-examination will be continued to-morrow. SENATOR WEST'S EXPLANATION OF THE LETTER FROM GOVERNOR WELLS, Wasninaton, Feb. 5, 1877. In the Senate to-day Mr. West, of Louisiana, said ha availed himself of this opportunity to make an ex- planation in relation to the proceedings in Louisiana during the.count of the vote, which he was not por- mitted to make before the committee of the House of Reprosentatives on Saturday last, Some time last week ho became cognizant of the fact, through the public Journals, that a lotter from the President of the Returning Board of Louisiana addressed to him had not been delivered, It became evident to him that the House committee desiréd to know the contents of that letter. On Saturday last, when he learned the com- mittee had the letter, he voluntarily weat betore that committee, without waiting for a subpoena, opened and read the letter to . Had he xeen proper he could have availed himself of hia privilege as Senator and might have declined to make kuown the contents of the letter, but ho desired to 1t all matters in regard to the Louisiana vote be made public. He had not held, nor did he intend to bold, any clandestine correspondence i regard to the count ol the electoral vote, The House committee denied him che privilege of making a statement to go betore tho public with the letter, About the time that the letter should have been delivered to him be was in- formed by the Secretary of War that a man’ by the name ot Maddox was in this city professing to have authority to trade for the Louisiana Returning Board, ‘He (Mr. West) dented that it could be possible, ana im- mediately telegraphed in cipher to a iriend in New Ur- leans, in substance-as foliows :— Tell Governor Wells that a man by the name of Maddox fs here, protexsing to be authorized to speak for him and the Returning sourd of Louisiana, What docs this meant The answer cume back as soon as the wire could bring it Mr, Maddox lad no such authority, As soon ashe (Mr. West) learned that this pedler was here, he took pains to sift the matter, and found there was notbing in it, Mr. Thurman inquired if the Senator had com- municated to the House committee the statement just made by him, Mr, West replied that he had no opportunity to do so, Ho was crowded down, Mr. Bogy asked li the Senator could explain the letter addressed to him by Governor Wells, That letter showed Maddox had authority from Wells. THR LETTER EXPLAINED. Mr, West said he presumed every Senator knew that he had some ambition to be his own successor la tho Senate, and the first part of Governor Weils’ lever rejerred to that, As to speaking of millions being used against tne republican party, ho presumed Governor Wells used the term somewhat ag Colonel Sellers did. He meant a barrel of money was being used there against the party, and the party needed aid and counsel; in other words, that where money was being spent on one side it must be spent on the other. About Christmas he (Mr. West) saw Gov. ernor Wells, and he never even alluded to the leer; therefore, It could not have made much impression on his mind, He (Mr, West) would not for a moment reat under any suspicion of jrailicking in electoral votes. Mr. Davis, of West Virginia, inquired it the Senator knewthat Maddox was a government oilicer and had been sent to New Orleans tora purpose, Mr. West said that it haa been represented to him that Maddox was a government official, but he never heard of him until November last, and when he went tothe Treasury Department to inquire it he was a government official he could not verity tho fact, but it was becauso he did not inquire at the right office, WELLS’ TESTIMONY DENIED. MR, KENNER ON THE ALLEGED TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR OFFER, [BY TELEGRAPH TO THE HERALD.) Naw Oxceans, Fob, 5, 1877. Duncan F, Kenner denies the truth of Woils’ testl. mony given to-day at Washington, but ailirms the statement that Wells made the offer to him to count in ilden for $200,000, which offer he declined to consider. THE NEWARK MURDERERS, GOVERNOR BEDLE SAYS THAT THE DEATH BEN- TENCE WILL BE CARRIED OUT ON FRIDAY NEXT. Trextoy, Feb. 5, 1877. Governor Bedle informed a Hxnap reporter to-day that Ryan and Ozchwald, the Nowark murderers, would be executed on Friday next beyond all question: ‘The sister of Ryan and Oschwala’s mother waited upon the Governor, the former on Saturday night last and the latwr yesterday, at nis residence im Jersey City, to plead for the condemned men another week's ‘The Governor positively declined to grant quest. He said that he was sorry that the un- foriunate men were lod to believe that there wus any hope of a respite, Ho bad given the mater bis most caretul attention, and alter the signing of the death wurrant on Friday last the Governor said that he thought all applications for clemency should have ceased, The dread sentence of the law will undoabt odly be carried out in the Eesex county Jail on Friday next, rr In the Legis OTION OF THB LEGISLATURR, ture last night action was taken which gives a litte hope to the condemned men, Oschwold and Ryan, — To-night Senator Magic, one of thei counsel, introduced a bill, and jt was passed in the Senate, which gives authority to any Judge of the Court of Oyer and Terminer to issue a writ of error iP capital cases that carries with it a stay of execution until the case shail be decided by a higher court Heretofore the Chancellor only was empowered to gtant such a writ, Tho bill will pass the House to- morrow, and if it is signed by the Governor a weit will be issued in the cases of Ryan and Oschwold, thus Saving them from the gallows, at least, on Friday next TAMMANY SOCIBTY. At the regular monthiy meeting of the Tammany Pociety, ast evening, Charles H, Haswell, of the Seventeenth district, was elocted and installed with the appropriate coremontes Sachem in piace of relation to @ cipher or key toacipher? A, 1 did nov Jato Colonel James Bugisy,