Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1879-11-28

Every Honest Man Blush.
Mr.. Dennelly left last night for Washing
ton, to press his contest for the seat fraudu-
lently occupied by w. D. Washburn.
Through the persistent misrepresentation
of Washburn and his gang of hired lackies,
an effort has been made to create the i'm
preston that Donnelly has mo case," be-
cause the official returns give Washhurn
3,O13 majority. The chief point at issue
has not been and is not to prove that 3,O13
illegal votes were cast for Washburn (thoueh
even that might be done), but to show that
he obtained his election by the most shame
less bribery. TO give the public better
understanding of this matter, we present
herewith an abstract and extracts from Mr..
Donnelly's briefs, wherein he reviews the
testimony secured.
His first brief commences By giving the
copy of the official returns, and then
says:
1t appears from the above table that in the
district outside of Hennepin county (upon
which much of the contest turns), Iynatius
Donnelly had majority Of 472 over the con-
testee.
1t further appears from the said table that
Of the 8, 4S5 majority claimed for Washburn
from Hennepin county, ia were based upon
supplemental returns, made long after tho
time fixed by law and about which the officers
Of the election do not agree. These irregular
votes, being deducted from Washburn's appar-
ent majority, reduce it to It'll.
But it is conceded by the counsel for the con-
tesree (see pages 260 and 2S4 of the printed
testimony that Ignatius Donnelly received tie
following majorities which were not counted
for him:
In Stearns coucty. ............. .252 majority.
In morrison ................ "
lOtal ....o4S
This being deducted from the ostensible ma.
jority of 2,77l, leaves 2,422.
But Of this 9, 422 majority, ISL is derived
from Kittson county. As to this vote the con-
testee will scarcely claim that it is legal. The
county WAS wholly unorganized; there were no
county or township officers in the county
there ia no law OF the State of Minnesota to
empower the Governor to establish polling
places in wholly nnorganized counties (see ex-
hibit e. A. H., page 73, printed testimony;
the voters were almost all non residents, men
engaged'in building railroad through the
county, while the statutes of Minnesota deny
the right Of suffrage to parties in precinct for
Temporary purposes (see stat. sec. 50. o. 66),
:
nearly every vote polled was bought and paid
for; the voting was held at depot buildings or
In freight cars, with cigar boxes for ballot box
es, without registration lists or any other of
tho safeguards which the laws of the State re-
quire, and the returns were made to and can
vassed by the officers Of Polk county with
which it had no connection whatever.
This clearly illegal vote, deducted
from the majority of the contestee leaves
On apparent majority of 2,241.
Continuing, MFR. Donnelly sets cd that
votes from other unorganized counties
should be thrown out and that the failure to
return Donnelly votes owing to the defective
election blanks, should also he taken into
consideration. If this is done it reduces
Washburn's apparent majority to 8l5.
In seven precincts Indianapolis
the ballots were numbered in
spite of the legal decision those it
was unconstitutional to do SO. and that seven
precincts gave Washburn 1850 majority,
The brief adds:
The numbering OF the ballots was enforced in
the precincts having the largest labor popula-
ton. Its purpose was evidently to intimidate
the laboring men whose means Of living de-
pended upon the good will of their employers.
that their ballot might be made public at any
time, to their great injury, as we will show
when We come to consider the question of in
timidation.
The contestee must accept either one horn of
the dilemma or the other. If it was proper to
number the ballots in seven precincts of the
city of Minneapolis then it was proper to mum.
Der them in all.
/ We have reduced the contestees majority to
BIB. If the committee strike out the vote OF
the seven precincts where the ballots were
numbered it would leave ma ority of 9l0 for
the contestant.
Much detail of bribery by Washburn is
given in Donnelly's first brief, with quota
tions from the evidence, but as it is summar-
lied in the second brief, we quote but one
or two instances. Bernard Cloutier, Demo-
crat, testified to meeting Cnas. W. Johnson,
Washburn's secretary, as follows:
told him (Johnson) I was already to start,
and wanted some money, SO he called me into
the postofice and gave me thirty dollars. He
wanted to1Inow if that would do me for the
present, and l told him it would. I went
away Sunday morning and got back Wednas-
day. met Mr.. johnson at Mr.. Washburn' 8
Office. He asked me how everything looked out
in the country. I told him every thing looked
favorable. He asked me how it looked for
Washburn. I told him I thought Mr. Wash
burn would run first rate. He asked me about
leading men. told him what l thought about
the different candidates. He wantt d to know
when was going out again. and / told him in
a few days and that l wanted some more
money. He asked me how much wanted, and
I told him I wanted 800. he (iNr. Johnsoa)
acent into the neat room and commenced talinq
scith -Nr. Washbwm. he came back and handel
me $40.
COMMENTS.
This evidence also stands unassailed and un-
coutradicted.
1t shows that an active Democratic poll
tlclan, who has made up his mind to take no
part in the Congressional campaign, is induced
by the payment of fifty dollars to 20 out and
work for the sitting member. This purchase
is made by the secretary Of the Republican dis
trict committee, @. W. johnson, and part of
the purchase money is paid in Mr.. Washburn's
Office and in his presence. The witness, an in
voluntary one, of course tries to save himself
from possible Indictment for bribery, by de-
claring in his cross-examination that his nat.
ural preference was for Mr.. Washburn; but we
would suggest that it is not usual to pay man
fifty dollars to vote as he already intends to
vote.
BUYING UP WHOLE CAMP OF wOOD-CHOPPERs.
Arthur J. White, of Minneapolis, Repub-
ican, and q reluctant witness, testifies (p. 3O5,
Print. Test. that he and q man named Web
ster had contract to get out wood for the st.
Paul Pacific railroad company, in the wilder
ness, at Tamarack river, Kittson county, in the
fall of 1873; that they had about eighty Oh
ninety men employed; the county was unnr-
gained, but the Governor had established
illegally a voting place at Tamarack. He
swears that he paid these men $3.50 to $l70 for
going to the polls and voting the vote at that
polling place stood 100 for Washburn and for
Donnelly.]
G.: What was the gross sum that you paid,
or allowed IN this way?
A. I don't know; think $3.50 or $40.
Q. Has that money been repaid to you?
A. Yes, sir.
@. Who by?
A. Rv q man named GEORGE r Wah.tor