The weekly mountain Democrat. [volume] (Placerville, El Dorado County, Calif.) 1861-1862, 1862-12-20
VIII
The Contested Election Case.

severely and unJustly upon The decision
of Judge johnson in the contested cleo
ton case Of RiebSam vs.. Davis. The cdi-
torial matter Of that paper is generally Of
such character as 10 attract bat little
attention and call for no comments. The
article in question would not be worthy
Of notice were it not supposed to have
emanated from member Of the Bar.
The intrinsic evidence of the source from
which it comes, is contained in the fourth
parag, aph. Its author modestly tells the
reader that he viii not give history Of
the case SO that he may Judge for himself
:: X! .-..,..s y sSat he will give facts
| for the conclusion to which he has
arrived. Is the writer placing Judge
johnson at the bar Of public opinion, or
him elf?
When the writer impcachcd the integ
rity of Judge johnson, because of the
Judges opinion, it then Hecame a matter
Of public interest, and the public are en-
titled, not to n statement Of facts which,
in the writer's opinion, may go to justify
! his conclusions, bat to a clear and Sntia-
/ factory statement Of all the facts, so that
the public may judge whether their ser
want has been guilty Cfthe improper con.
duct alleged. That statement Of facts,
which is necessary to judge of this mat
ter, | propose giving.
J WhcD ibe case Mns called for trial the
first time, the counsel for the respondent
asked for jury. The Court granted it,
remarking that he was not certain that
the respondent was entitled to n jury.
! The jury-a partisan jury and friends Of
! the cSpondcut-wcrc called and sworn.
The counsel for the contestant produced
their evidence, and among other evidence
they oiEcied Eddy'S official map of the
State, stating, at the time, that it charac-
ter, as evidence, could not br determined
until the argument cf the case. To this
there was no objection on the part Of the
respondent. The respondent then pro-
cccdcd to introduce his testimony.
Among the witnesses were Geo. W. Swan
and Sam. EnSminSer and Evil here
quote the language Of the News and al
low the reader to make the application.
Almost every witness introduced by
the contestant was an active partisan. or
a broken down political hack, whose
rank prtjndiccs were clinsinS to him"
Upon the cross-cxan alton Of Ems
mingcr, he was asked II he had Mt re-
qnlsted certain man--ta!i.ng his tame
to bc present on that Gay FIR thr pur-
pose Of being on tie ju.H to t'y ihc case.
| Ensminger he>iated and Stammcred, and
the Judge Informed him l,at ii his answer
would criminatc himself he could Cain
his privilege. EEsmingcr claimed his
iilegc.
When the evidence f + the respondent
closed the Court was adjourned until Mon
day morning following. Upon the argu-
memt Of the case on Monday, the counsel
for the contestant prodHcgd numerous
authorities from the decisions oC the high
est Con- Is OF Il huhhrr ct t''e states, HAT
map OF me character tie Legislature la /
given to kddy ; was conclusive cvi!tnce
"i what 1t contained Alter the close Of
the argument, upon the part oF TIE con-
testant, the counsel for the respondent re-
ilhed lei"'t he closed the Court inform
J Sd nm HAT unless he produced huthori-
ties to overtu'n those produced 10y the
contestant, he would bc compelled to in
Struct the jury that the map WAS conciu'
sive evidence OF the boundaries of the
county. Inc counsel Tor the respondent
replied that he had 10 authorities, but
that he disputed the principle laid down
by tie Authorities quoted:
Upon the close OF the argument ;hc
Court instructed Tie Jury that tie map
was conclusive evidence theJuFy retired,
but Could not agree. Another trial was
ordered and the Court aJournrd until the
day fixed.
Before the day fixed for the trial the
Board Of Supervisors OF Placer county,
/ '~"''''''o "'' e = va "a
this county IN reference to the boundary
between tins county and Placer. telegraph
ed to the FL Dorado Board, then in ses-
sion, proposing to cali upon the Surveyor
General, IN pursuance oil the 9th section
OF the ACT IN regard TO Inc duties oil that
officer to run the boundary line between
the two counties Inc +! Dorado Board
declined the proposition without de'gnng
to give a reason Tor their singular refusal,
the respondent oelhs one OF inc board
ana his witness, swan ano'her' anu the
two controlilhg us acilon.
/ mat reason could inc Board have had
IN refusing 10 JON WIN race: county IN
a matter SO important 10 both counties
AT that very time we haa ana sun nave
IN our Ja'l man chafseu win the crime
OF murder, committed on the disputed ter