The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1879-08-06
THE INVESTIGATION.
Examination Of Witnesses by the Con-
gressiOnal Committee.

session, respecting the scope .. the investi-
CATION. Mr.. Brownies resolution asking
that the election of 1876 also be inyesti-
gated, was first considered, and after a
lengthy debate was lost, the Republicans
voting for, and the Democrats against it.
Mr.. Kenna's resolution limiting the inves-
| tigation to the election of 1873 was then
| adopted, the Democrats voting for, and the
| Republicans against it. MIR. Conger then
offered resolution setting forth that as the
memorialsts had petitioned only for the
repeal of the law, it is the duty of this
Committee to examine into and report to
| the House of Representatives such facts
and circumstances as they may find have
existed in former Congressional elections
| in Cincinnati, if any, as may require the
continuance of such laws and their en-
| forCement. Lost.
THIS MORNINGS SESSION.
Parker Dixon, Assistant District At
torney, was the first witness called by the
defense this morning, the memorialists
having closed their testimony yesterday.
The witness testified that Hayman called
at the District Attorneys office when the
witness was there alone and stated that
the Democrats had employed him to work
up evidence against Mr. Butterworth. 1t
was ST. Hoffman who had spoken to him,
and he expected to get $3.50 as the neces-
sary expenses for getting the evidence from
Kentucky, for he knew all about the Ken
lucky men. The Democrats held meeting at
the Grand Hotel and had decided to employ
him. lie was a Republican but he could
make money out of it. Mr.. Carlisle he said
was connected with the affair and other
prominent men. The witness advised him
to keen out of the affair, but he
went into it to do the best he could.
Havman then stated that he wished to see
Mr.. Richards about it and went away. On
crosse Examination the witness stated that
Hayman was seldom if ever in their office
until the last election and was never em
ployed by the District Attorney to work up
frauds.
John Critchell, member of the Repub-
lican Campaign Committee, was next
called, and testified that he employed Mr..
Francis, as he had been employed in pre-
vious years, to bring over a certain number
of men from Covington to watch the
polls to prevent Kentucky repeaters from
getting in their work. The question was
discussed by the Campaign Committee, who
were advised by Republicans from Coving.-
| ton that there were many men who resided
| in Covington who were employed on this
side and that it was suspected heretofore
that they voted in Cincinnati. 1t
was for this reason that they decided to
| employ these men. He knew Francis to be
a competent man, and accordingly engaged
| him, with four other men, to watch and see
| if any men came over and took up their
residence in the boarding-houses along the
river. On election day there were to be thir-
| ty men brought over, and paid So for their
days work. Francis and the four other
men were paid IS day, and together with
the incidental expenses made total OF
$l85. These men were to make themselves
known to the officers at each poll, and they
did their duty satisfactorily. The men
were stationed by Francis in the river
Wards but very few men were brought
from Newport to watch the Wards opposite
| that city.
James S. Francis, who had control of the
men who were brought over from COying-
| ton, was next sworn. He stated that he
had been police officer and was now an
| lindependent detective. In 1876 he had
been employed by Amor Smith to bring
over eight men to watch the polls. In 1876
he was asked to bring over fifty men at So
per day, but he refused at those figures.
They then agreed to pay him So a
day for thirty men, which PROPOSE
ton was accepted. He spent four
days looking over the registers of the diff
ferent hotels and boarding houses along
the river, and on election day the men were
| divided into squads Of six men each with a
captain for each squad. He had control of
one squad himself and stationed four OF
| his men in the Eighteenth Ward and
| in the Nineteenth. He instructed his men
not to hold tickets or take any part in the
| election, and was certain that his orders
were carried out He met Tom Shay, who
told him that they did not want any Ken
| III bnr la oil low
| ris but did not have the conversation with
| him which Harris testified took place, nor
| did he meet Harris at any other time near
the election. He had conversation with
Mr.. Hayman on the 22d of July, who told
him that he was employed by 81. Hoffman
| to work up evidence, and had 500 to do it
with. He went with him to
see Edwards, and he believed
Edwards promised to furnish the names of
| thirteen who would sware that they voted
illegally. He next met Hayman at a sa-
| loon and was told that Campbell had been
engaged for 81 600 to conduct the investi-
CATION. Hayman then promised to give
| the witness a portion of the money if he
would help him work up the case. Farrell,
who stated that he knew of evidence in the
case, was afterwards furnished with a
suit of clothes and pair of shoes, but af-
terwards denied that he made the affidavit.
| Hayman told him on several oc-
cesions that Tom. Campbell wished
| to see him at his office the next
Sunday, but the witness refused to comply
since he wished TO have nothing to do with
Campbell. The men whom he brought
over were all good hardworking men, al
though one had been in the Penitentiary,
another had been in some trouble some
| time ago, and a third was a snide gambler
The men were all Republicans with the ex-
ceptions of these bad ones, who were Demo
Gratis.
| Jerry Reed, one of the men brought over
| from Covington on election day, corobor-
ated the testimony of Francis.
DR.. Thrall was recalled and stated that
| Gus. Colcher's name was suggested to him
for Deputy Marshal, and after some hest
tation appointed him.
Mr.. Claiming Richards, United States
| District Attorney, stated conversation
which he had with Hayman, which differed
somewhat from Hayman's testimony.
Gov. Young testified respecting the man.
ner in which campaigns are conducted.
He spent money he said for speakers torch.
| light professions, platforms, beer tickets
to festivals and concerts, etc. The county
is nearly evenly divided between the
two parties, and q large amount
of money is expended by candidates
on both sides. Candidates for the most
part conduct their own campaigns, and he
did the same. He paid 81, 900 as his assess
ment, and about 81, 400 in his own way,
but not cent of this was paid for any ille-
| gal purpose. He never sent for Democrat
to come to him, nor had he ever hired a
Democrat to work for him until he had
first offered his service.
Thomas Edwards, of Covington, stated