Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1855-10-15
Ma. EDIroR: The action of the Board os

cd, is Of q character to attract attention
it certainly merits the earnest consider.
alton of every one interested In the welfare
and prosperity Of this city.
The supplemental report Of the committee
of the Board of Aldermen on the elip;biiitv Of
Assessors, published in your paper a few DAYS
since, which sets forth the evidence unon
which they acted, and also their conclusions
thereon, bears upon its face such startling and
conclusive evidence of predetermined inten-
ton to disregard every principle of law and
justice, in order to accomplish a fixed Dur
pose, that 1t behooves all good citizens to be-
ware, and to reflect seriously ON the conse.
quences which must necessarily grow ont Of
such proceedings on the part of their represen-
tatives II permitted to pass unrebuked. Your
readers will ecOllect that the report of the Joint
committee appointed to investigate the eligi-
bllity Of the Assessors elected in June last
when referring to the case of Mr. Clampitt,
merely stated that he was foreign born, and
mad not been naturaliEed, and studiously
avoided any statement Of the evidence on
which they arrived at that conclusion They
Will also recOllect that DR.. Thomas Miller,
member Of the Board of Aldermen, who had
been advised that the decision was most unjust
and Illegal offered q resolution calling for the
evidence on which the decision was founded.
1t was in reply to this resolution that the re-
port herein alluded to was made DR.. Miller
""o pASpdlOu W oHON tucTe Was no lSHIi
or direct ground for declaring Mr.. Clampitt
ineligible to the Office of Assessor.
Unfortunately professional engagement
! prevented him from attending the meeting OF
the Board on Monday last; but nOtwithstaId-
ing his unavoidable absence, the matter was
! pressed with unseemly eagerness and finally
! acted on. That the resolution should have
been called up and acted on in the absence of
its mover, is in violation Of that most common
OF all the rules of courtesy which are rccOg-
Missed in legislative bodies. Common decency
forbade such proceeding. 1t will only be
| necessary for me to present again to your
readers that portion CT the report which fol
! lows:
| The only question for investigation, in the
J opinion of your committee, is whether William
| II. Clampitt, the Assessor elect for the Second
! Ward. is q citizen of the United States. and
| your committee are unable to obtain that evil
dence in any other way than by the inference
| that may be drawn from Mr.. Clampitt's re-
fusal TO answer questions and 4, which have
! reference particularly to the declarations O.
| his parent, than whom, it must be obvious
go other could directly testify on this point
| as he, If born in foreign country, must have
| been brought here at very early age. Your
| committee have no hesitation in saying, from
the testimony, and more particularly from his
| refusal to answer said questions 3 and f. tina.
! IT Is their opinion that Mr.. Clampitt was born
| in foreign country, although they are una
BILE to obtain tho evidence direct as to the
| fact"
This report seems to have been prepared
with the expectation that those reading i
| would forget az they read. We find in the
first part that the only evidence the commi.tcc
can obtain to show that Mr.. Clampit. i o.
foreign birth is " the inference from his re-
iusaI to answer certain questions. Yet, rs W.
| cot further on al ut
although they are unable to obtain q the evi-
dence direct as to the fact is founded on the
- testimony which includes his refusal t.
answer the questions before alluded TO- What
testimony That which traced him back 70
his earliest childhood rs n resident Of thi,
city! Thet which showed him to have been q
voter IN this city for more than ten years? o.
hat which showed that his earliest reeollec.
tions were associated with this city-that be
knew no other country than this? Surely none
Il this. Yet, what other testimony is there in
the report None, save this - inference 81
opinion" of the committee. Apart from TIE
rules OF law, no reasonable, uuprciudiced mar
can read this report AID arrive at any Cthe
conclusion than that if born in foreigI
country there is evidence to show it, an,
that Mr. Clampitt should therefore be treated
as citizen of the United States God forbid
that the time shall ever arrive when poltica
opponents can with impunity deprive any
American citizen of his dearest rights an.
privileges without some better reason than
their suspicious or opinions unfounded in Law
Cr fact, The rules Of law applicable I, NJ
Cl4mpitt's case can be briefly stated
1t Is IA well settled rule, and was so decide
in the case Of the State va. Beakmo, 9th Black
fori, ?. 4o8-that the law presumes all pcr
, sons VINO reside among Us to be citizens of II,
, United States until the contrary appears. Tn
rreport OF the committee does not merely shor
that Mr.. Cllmpitt has resided among Us fo
, many years-which, alone would have brough
, him within the rule laid down in the abov,
case but also that for the last ten or lively,
: years he has exercised the privilege of votinl
: at all municipal elections, which could no
have been accorded TO him but as a citizen G
| the United States These with all the othe
) circumstances reported by the committee 2,
lar TO make conclusive the presumption Of Law
that Mr.. Cllmp:tt ia citizen OF the Unite,
State. Clearly established as this presunp
ton was in Mr.. Clampitt's ease, it was ncces
sary i)r the committee 20 meet ii with proper
and legal evidence showing that he actual
was not citizen. The burthen of proof wa,
upon them. This presumption is no mere tech
meal rule of law, bat is founded on reason and
common sense. Were the rule otherwise and
the presumption against citizenship. ther
could many native citizens be deprived
u their votes at an election Such a rule
would only allow foreigners who had been M.
turalized-and, therefore, could produce evi.
dence OF citizenship or citizens born in the
District, the privilege Of voting An instance
viii show the absurdity of such rule
Il native citizen, born in some distant State.
but who has resided here for many years and
has always voted at the municipal elections,
presents himself at the polls. A political OBJ
ppnent objects that he is foreign born Is tie
| one offering TO vote to produce naturalization
| papers, or prove that he was born within the
United States! If 50, he is deprived of his
vote. To make the illustration more forcble:
suppose the election was being held in the
State Of California. 1t may be well to re-
member that man cannot swear as to the
place OF his birth Fortunately, no such rule
as that last referred to exists and the com
mIttee seem to have been of the opinion that
IN consequence Of MIR. Clampitt's residence
among Us, his having previously voted, &c =,
that nc was to be considered as citizen of tho
United states until the contrary WAS shown.
ard therefore made the effort to show it by