The Kalida venture. [volume] (Kalida, Ohio) 1841-1865, 1847-01-29

Other andidatesasit would hutl his business. !.
The best evidence on tbis, point weuld be The
deposition Of Marklinser himself but that
has moi teen taken. From his own declafa-
|, don, and The circumsiantiA Evidence, ihero
can hardly be- q doubt but ihis Daniel Mark
Iinger veted for Nj. Cox, instead q Mr. Wil-
ford. ,.3 x. :. ( ~. z, VA,
Geo Widen, The fathcf, aild Geo, 4.
Widen, the son, also voted ID this township.
they wsfS foreigners, bat, whether natural
lied or not dess not appear, as their deposi
items have moi been taken, and they we're
not challenged at The election; and there
fore no certificate Of naturalization was re-
quired or Produced They haye long been
residents of Wayne county ,ahd itappearsby
common -consonh have enjoyed ali the rights
aud privileges Of ofcilizenship. Geo. f. VIII
den, formerly resided al Rsedsburgh in that
county, aid was Posimaster there between
1884, and 1s40, al appears from the deposi-
tion Of Cooper, Postmaster at Wooster.
They are called. hardn democrats, and from
that fact il is presumed they voted for VIII
ford. There is no other s iiaence, and this,
in the opinion Of your committee, cannot be
conclusive. 'ss's' iss't ~ s's''tin "a 'ssts
q II is also alleged n tho Memorial, lfat
William Immel, Jacob Kali, and Ssallsl
Kline, legal yetors Of East Union townsilik,s
offered 10 vote for MI. Cox, but that s6pif
votes we're illegally rejected by the Jndgfs
The testimony does not sustain this allega-
ton. Admitting their right 10 vote in this
township, which is denisd, Kline and I'm
nell when challenged, refused 10 swear, and
Kali. when sworn, refused 10 answer tho
questions put to him by the Judges, accord
ing to the statute, and yet IS claimed these
men were deprived ofths privilege efsoting.
They say thu, Judges required them to sweat
they would live ID the township year,
The Judges in their dspesitions, whiet were
taken on the part Of the contestes, all state
they required these men, when challenged,
10 answer such questions only, as "was
worded Tor them iK the statute" They re-
Lquired ne one 10 swear they would reside in
the township q year. Under these crcum-
stances, there was no aEernatys but to re-
ject their yntes. The actual residence of
these men in the township was questionable,
and was probably the rcassa Of hlcirrefusing
TO swear. Immel stated be could vote in
Wooster, il he were there. And Kali said
he voted in Springfield, o., last spring, for
Justice sfthe Peace, and il there, he could
vote again. YES use tnet9 NsA asai
1t is also charged that John Wes,ly Carr,
a legal voter Of Perry township, was deprived
ofthe privilsge Of voting for the ccnisstor.
Ii is proved he was a resident of the town
ship, and of'Sge, and his vote was rejected
on the graund thathe was not charged or had
not paid a state Of county tax, or worked ON
the read. Miller, ono Of the judges depeses,
| that the Judges decided that man who had
paid or was charged with asta.e or county
tax or who had performed labor on tho high
way, was entitled to vote, if otherwise
qualified; and that a man who had no pro.
perry charged with a tax and had not per-
formed labor on the highway was net enti-
tied to a vote. On this ground Cars vote
was rejected. He was not sworn. The
vote Of Andrew H. Middaugh was also re-
jected son the samegrounds. His deposition
is taken, and no states hes he'd propefty,on
which tax might have been levied; that hs
vote was rejected, and that he would havo
tosvote is attached to his deposition, having
been putinto his pocket beck, where itnF4-
manned until attached TO the deposition.
The correctness or iRcorrectness Of the de-
cisien Of the Judges, is not material ID This
contest; forif Carr was deprived Of veto,
so also was Middaugh W! o would hare voted
for Willford.
Your committee have applied 10 cash
point made by the contestor, the evidence
he has taken, and without the robatting eu-
dence of the contestso, and without the
interpositon Of any technical objections o.
obstacles, upon the testimony alone, in the
opinion Of your committee, Mr.. Cox fails to
show one single fact orreason why he should
have a seat upon this floor. Bot If there are
any points which the Senate considers che
testimony sustans, the rebutting evidence Of
MIR. Willford is adduced 10 his aid. Allow
ing the centester 10 deduct from MIR. Will
ford's vete, all the illegal votes he alleges
were received, and he could deduct but
seven, including Marklngcf's, and The pre-
ponderance Of testimony is, that his soto
was given for Cox. By the safnes rales Of
evidence, these votes are allowed TO Mr..
Cox, MIR. Wllford would hd entitled 10 de-
duct eleven illegal votes given for the con-
testor proven in the same manner exclud-
ing Marklnger's; aud then it is proved that
the contester lost one vote in the township
of Chippewa, admitting the aumbsr and con-
Iditionof the ballots 10 be evidences and II
1isalso proved by the deposisians .of Fslss,
clerkain Wayne township, and 8. r. Bonns-