The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1857-11-05
PROCLAMATION OF GOVERNOR WALKER
LEcoMPToN, October ~, 1901.
To the People of Kansas:

LEcoMProN, October 10, 1857.
To the People Of Kansas:
By the 32d section of the organic act estao'
fishing this Territorial Government, 1t Is Provi'
died. IN reference to the ell sction OF Deiegate 70
Congress, that "the person having the greatest
number of votes shall be declared by the ttov'
ernor to be duly elected, and certificate there
of shall be given accordingly.
By the 10Th section of the act OF the Terri
torial Legislature of Kansas, entitled An act
to regulate elections" it is made the duty OF
the Secretary to examine the returns in the
presence of the Governor, and to "glve to the
person having the highest number OF votes IN
their respective districts certificates OF their eiec
ton to the Legislative Assembly"
Under these two provisions of the laws pre-
vailing in this Territory, the recent general
election has presented for the joint considera-
ton of the Governor and Secretary a question
of the gravest importance, not only to our own
people, but also to those of the whole Union.
This question arises upon the extraordinary
returns made from the precinct of Oxford, IN
the county of Johnson. What purport to be
the returns of the election held at that precinct
on the 9Th and 9Th instant, have been received
by the Secretary, containing sixteen hundred
and twenty eight names of pretended voters, or
Representative district. The disposition to be
made of this supposed vote is rendered allim-
portant By the fact that the political character
of the Legislative Assembly will be controlled
by the addition of three Councilman and eight
Representatives to the strength OF one party or
the other, according to the adoption or reJec
ton of the returns in question.
In point of fact, it is we'll known that even
the whole county Of johnson, comprising, as it
does, part of an Indian reserve, which, upon
examination of the law, we fnd is not yet sub
ject to settlements or presumption, can give no
such vote as that which is represented TO have
been polled at this inconsidersble precinct OF
Oxford. But while this unofficial knowledge,
well established and universal as 1t may be,
could not become the ground of decision and
action upon election returns In themselves
regular aud authentic, the legitimate effect OF
an apparent enormity, such as that IN question,
would necessarily be to induce close examina-
ton of the paper presented, and to require tor
its acceptance perfect compliance with all the
essential provisions of the law. Such an ex-
animation of this document, conscientiousy
and impartially made, has brought US to the
conclusion that the returns from Oxford pre-
cinct in johnson county must be wholly reject
ed, for the following reasons
LIST. 1t does not appear on the face OF the
document presented to US, or in any other man.
ner, that the Judges of election took the oath
imperativey required by the statute, to secure
the Impartial discharge of their duties &C.
cording to law"
I'd. 1t does not appear that the paper pre-
scented to US was one of the two original poll
books kept at the election, as required by law
but. on the contrary, it does appear, from I'M.
mis5skable internal evidence, that the paper
is either a copy of some other document, or has
been made up for the occasion, and is not the
genuine record Of the votes taken at the cleo.
ton. The law requires one of the poll books
to be returned to the Secretary, the other to be
deposited with the clerk of the board of COM
missioners of the proper county.
Sd. AS the vote of each elector was to be
recorded for each one oftwenty-two candidates,
and in more than hundred cases for twenty
five, and that by Utoa Uoce vote, it was
physical impossibility that the number of votes
pretended to have been taken on the second
day, being more than fifteen hundred, with
the name of the voter written, and each of
twenty-five candidates properly designated,
could have been taken aud recorded within the
time prescribed by law.
4th. 1t is an extraordinary fact, tending to
throw distrust upon the whole proceeding, that
of the sixteen hundred and twenty. eight votes,
only one is given to the Delegate elect to Con.
gress and only one hundred and twenty -four
are recorded as having been cast for the local
candidates of the township.
Influenced by these considerations, and i'm
pressed with the great responsibility resting
upon us in regard to the fairness of the election,
and its freedom from all fraud susceptible of
detection and prevention within the scope of
our duties, we deemed it essential to truth and
justice that we should ascertain every fact cal
culated to refute or confirm the conclusions
derived from the face of the papers. Accord
ingly, we went to the precinct of Oxford, (which
is a village with six houses, including stores,
and without tavern,) and ascertained from
the citizens of that vicinity, and especially those
of the handsome adjacent village of New Santa
Fe, in Missouri, (separated only by a street, and
containing about twenty houses that altogether
not more than one-tenth the number of persons
represented to have voted were present on the
two days of the election much the smaller
number, not exceeding thirty or forty, being pres
ent on the last day, when more than fifteen
huL dred votes are represented as having been
given. The people of Oxford, as well as those
of the neighboring village of Santa Fe, were
astounded at the magnitude of the returns; and
all persons of all parties, in both places, treated
the whole affair with derision or Indignation,
not having uearu Cne 8leg6Q result until sever
al days after it had occurred.
In the course of our Journey to and from
Oxford, we passed over much the larger part of
the county of Johnson, and we became thorough
ly satisfied that there is no population in the
whole county, from which more than one-,hird
the vote of that single precinct could have been
given. We learn that some very few persons,
having cabins on the reserve in johnson county,
and claiming a residence therein, though gen.
orally absent, had voted at some of the precincts
In that county; but we are convinced that
very lnconsderable number, not reaching, we
believe, one hundred of Missourans or any
other persons having no admitted right to vote,
did claim or attempt to exercise that right, any.
where within that county. The people of Mis-
souri, cannot be justly charged with any inter.
ference in the late election, nor are they in any
degree complicated with the evidently fraudu-
lent returns made from the precinct of Oxford
Those returns, beyond all doubt, are simulated
and fictitious.
Under these circu instances, we do not feel
embarrassed by any technical difficulty as to
our right to go behind the returns. We hold
the returns themselves to be defective in form
and in substance, and therefore inadmssible. |
We go behind them, and inquire into the facts, |
only for the purpose of ascertaining whether, |
by these valid objections to the mere returns, |
our rejection of them will have the effect of de-
feating the will of the people, sought to be fair
" expressed at the polls. In the event of such |
We might hesitate to reject vote |
upon any defect of form, however essential in |
law. But, in the present case, we feel ourselves |
bound to adhere to the very letter of the law,
in order to defeat gross and palpable fraud. |
The consideration that our own party, by this
decision, will lose the majority in the Legisls-
i've Assembly, does not make our duty in the
premises less solemn and imperative. The