Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1878-12-26

THE Contest.


est man who is in favor of fair and hon
est investigation. The ease has now oe-
1 cupied the attention of the Court since
the 18th inst. NJ. J. Williams, Esq, ap-
pearing for Smith, H. B. Maynard, Esq,
for Cook. Smith has presented his side
of the question, and the inquest has been
full and complete. No question which
has been asked the witnesses by the
plaintiff, that tended to throw any light on
the subject, has been objected to by Col.
Maynard, nor has any witness refused to
answer as to who he voted for; but on the
| contrary, every witness who was sup
t posed to have voted illegally, has testi-
/ fled without hesitation, fully and with
out equfVOcation or evasion. Be it under
stood right here, that Smiths witnesses
in the main aressRepublicans: who voted
/ for Cook. They are the men who do not
refuse to answer questions for fear of
eliminating themselves No sir. mot one
of them. But let us contrast the scene.
Smith rests case. He has had a ''fair
count" Col. Maynard calls his first wit
ness to the stand. Mr...Robinson, where
do you live? Ans. In Washington. Did
you vote at the last election? decline
to answer. Upon what ground do you
refuse to answer? For fear of crimi-
mating myself. = Attorney; you may step
aside; fFnext.'' Mr.-where do you re-
side? Ans. Washington Did you vote
at the last election !? decline to answer.
Upon what ground do you decline? The
law don't compel me to criminate my
self. You may step aside; 'snext." Mr..
Peare was brought in under attachment,
put on the stand, who voted in Concord
township; his wife was living in Illinois
at the time of the election, and is still
living there and is receiving support
from her husband. In answer to the
question, where do you live, after de-
mandfng his fees before testifying (being
Instructed to do so by employer) and the
small pittance being handed Ehim, which
opened his mouth, he answers, 1 live
some of the time at the Broom corn sheds,
in Jasper township, and part of the time
with s. c.. Roberts,, where make my
home. He declines to answer any fur
ther questions; hesdon,t want to crimi-
nate himself. He steps aside, S. c. Rob-
erts is called, man who would like to
be considered honorable and fair in all
his transactions. He is supposed to have
procured some illegal votes for Smith
from his broom corn cutters, which was
then in full blast. He took the stand.
Doctor, where do you liver demand
my fees before testifying. The paltry
sum of 81 ,35 was handed him and he was
/
Court without leave. He was wanted
for future use, and he may live to regret
that demand. If he could hear some OF
the comments by men on the street, he
would not have tolfve very leng to re-
gret it. Next witness called was Mr..
Samuel Jamison, life long Democrat,
who was raised and nilrtured from his
infancy on democratic milk Mr.. .Jami-
son voted by mistake in the wrong pre-
cinct. He was asked the usual question,
which one7of the candidates for Sheriff
| did you vote for at the last election !?
DON'T know. Whom did you intend to
vote forY DON'T know. Whom did you
want to vote forP Still he did not know.
When we consider that Mr.. Jamison is
an educated man ,ao1ies who always takes
an interest in elections, does any one
think he did not know for whom he voted !?
We forbear comment on this case. And
so the case drags along from day to day,
each succeeding day duplicating the pre-
eeeding one. Individual criticism of
these witnesses is unnecessary here, as an
honest, discriminating public will criti-
cise-them enough, nodoubt. But it.does
seem passing strange that men should
prefer to place themselves before the pub
lie in the light of criminals, rather than
come up like men and tell the whole
truth. Shame on the man who could be
guilty of such disregard for their own
honor, and fair, and honest dealing. Such
men have, no doubt, a legal right to shield
themselves behind the law which says nc
man shall be compelled to testify to any
Z fact which will tend toeriminate himself,
but in the refusal to testify on thai
ground, do they not lay the foundation
for a criminal prosecution for illegal vo.
ting. We believe that healthy, vigorou.
prosecution before the United States Cour
for illegal voting, will save us mucI
: trouble in the future. An example shoulC
be made of some of these very men. TIL,
; question which presents itself to the re
fecting mind, after reading this testi
, mony is, why this marked difference il
the two sets of witnesses? What infiuen
ces are there in the Democratic ranks tha
/ cause man to equivocate, squirm ant
: vince under an examination calculated t
illicit the truth? Why can't these wit
nesses testify like honest men, tell tn
whole truth which, in taking the oath
= they said they would do? There seem
to be an atmosphere in the Democrat
franks which forbids it. Witnesses sum
moned by Cook, as soon as they max
their appearance, are bounded down an
: advised how to testify. The law is ez
5 planned to them by every Democrat the
meet; men who can't read, (and there ar
:. many of snch in the Democratic ranks
y expound the law to them in a very learne
manner, and lawyers furnish them wit
written opinions without charge, and
e one of their own witnesses, after consit
|. ering over his former testimony, COZ
q cludes to make a clean breast of it an
L tell the truth, the attorneyfo the plain
Ir iff gets furious, rants and threatens
# prosecute men whom he accuses of ssbul
II dozing'' his witnesses-all because th
witness concluded to remove lock fro
his lips-then the attorney who has
> kindly furnished the written opinion al
= gets nothing fer it, gets mad and goes f
the witness because he has not taken h
g advice. Mr.. Cook is seen talking to
IF man from the country, Smith and h
hackers keep an eye on him, and as sol
3 as Mr.. Cook leaves the man, Smith al
as his pood1es- break for him. and acoost hi
,e with "what was Cook talking to V,
. Iahn11tS, esNhat was he saving To unn