True American. [volume] (Steubenville [Ohio]) 1855-1861, 1858-06-09

Mississippi and his three sssoeiales-and
| think that they report correclly-slates
Ihattwo non-residents Of the ward voted
for vallandigham, and none for the sitting
member. If you come, then to strike a
balance between these gentlemen the con-
teslant and my colleague, under Lheit
four heads, instead of my colleague Mr..
Campbell having majority of nineteen
over the contestant, Mr.. Vallandigham,
he has. in fact, majority of twenty two.
Now, sir, there are three other points
made by the contestant, and on which he
has adduced his heresay proof. One is in
regard to non-residents Of the county who
voted at the election; one is in regard to
non residents of the State who voted at
that election; and another is in regard to
mulattoes or negroes who voted at that
election. Those are the three and only
remaining points. For the purpose oil
my argument, might consent here that
six non.residents Of the county who are
reported on this heresay proof to have
voted at that election, did vote as claimed
Did they all vote for the sitting member !!
Waving my objection 10 this secondary
proof, in the absence of the poll-books,
which furnish the best evidence of the
fact whether these six men voted at all |;
admitting, in the absence Of the legal
proof that they Gid vote as claimed, and
that they voted for my colleague, Mr..
Campbell, how does the record stand?
1t stands, even with that admission, upon
the proof of the contestant, at six less
than twenty-five majority leaving sixteen
majority for the sitting member, Mr..
Campbell. ]
What next! Allowing, in the absence
of the legal proof 10 be furnished by the
poll books, that negroes and mulattoes to
the number Of fifteen, as claimed, did, in
fact. vote at that election, and allowing
still further, in the absence of proof, that
they did vote for Campbell, it still leaves
Campbell majority of one over the con.
testant, and that too upon the showing of
the four gentlemen of the committee, who
report here most favorably for the contes-
lant, Mr.. Vallandigham.
What point, then, remains of the case
Only the point that, votes of non.residents
of the State were given at that election.
will dispose of that point briefly.
dispose of il in this way. The gentlemen
who reported favorably for the contestant
Mr.. Valandigham found it very conve-
nient in their printed argument or report
10 refer TO The testimony Of persons relied
on to prove the fact that fifteen negroes
did vote at that election for Mr.. Campbell,
while they found it very inconvenient to
refer TO the testimony of single man
who shows the fact that nonresident Of
the State, Of any name whatever, voted
at tina, election, much less that any such
nonresident voted for the sitting member,
Mr.. Campbell. I undertake to say
upon that point because the whole case
is now narrowed down TO that-that no
man who looks candidly at this record can
come to the conclusion that the fact is
proved. Having, by conceding facts to
be proved, which are not proved, reached
the point Of the votes of non-residents of
the State, and upon which the whole case
turns after conceding all that has been
assumed by and for the contestant,
plant myself upon the principle of com
mon law and common sense, and which
in spite of the parliamentary cases cited
by the contestant from the English cases,
prevails in all bodies which sit in judg.
ment upon anybody's or any community's
rights-that the best evidence Whieh the
nature OFF the case admits Of must be ad-
duced.
say, then, in relation to the fact,
whether thirly.ons non-residenls Of the
State Of Ohio, or any greater or less num-
ber of such non residents, voted at thai
election, the best evidence that any one
or more of such persons so voted is the
soritten evidence of a fact which the law
of the State authorized and required to bt
made out at the time Of the transaction,
under oath, by the judges and clerks ol
the election, and which was deposited il
pursuance Of that law, at the offices o.
the clerk of the common pleas of the re
, speciive counties of the district, and which
. is there preserved. / submit it to thu
common sense and candor Of every gen
, tleman upon all sides of the House
} whether that written evidence is not NOR
t reliable than the slippery, treacherou
{ memory of thousand Witnesses VIII
3 stood, mingling with the tllrong, at th
: election, and partaking of the excitemen
7 of that day, and who have nothing 6o
f their memory to rely upon, to prove tn
fact that those persons did, in fact, vot
: at all
|, That evidence is not produced in thi
{. case; and l say the fact that thirty non
g residents did vote al that election is nc
proved, though there is heresay evidenc
D to that effect, while the best evidence
withheld. Ii rested on the contestant t
i make out his case by the best evidence
$ and until he does so, the House shoul
i not SET aside the authority of the grei
i seal of Ohio, by which my colleague hold
r his seat. TIE contestant has given n
: excuse for failing to produce 1.-THE wri
s ten proofs, the best evidence. He ha
h introduced by way of analogy for th
: neglect, through his counsel, futi
evasion, by having them say in his behal
!. that The poll.books are not records. The
e are written evidence, open 10 inspection
" and as l remarked before, everybod
knows that the custodians Of that write
n evidence were liable. by compulsoI
1t process, to be compelled to produce
n and, in their deposilions, to set out Il