Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1880-01-07
A MINNESOTA CONTEST.
now WA. DREW wAsHBURNE ROLLED
uPA MAJORITY OF 3 3,000--BRIBERY,
FRAUD AND INTIMIDATION by
THE wHoLEsALE--MR.
DoNNELLY's STORY.


Our Congressional district is not the
only one in which huge frauds were
practiced by the Radicals at the cleo
ton OF 1878. The Minnesota case is q
sample of our own district alluded to
by the interviewer of the Washington
Post, as follows:
A short, thick-set, pugnacious-look.
ing man is lgnatius Donnelly, whose
present mission is the pulverization Of
the numerous Washburne family. Mr..
Donnelly claims to have been elected
to Congress last Fall from the Third
Minnesota district, and Mr.. William
Drew Washburne insists that back of
his certificate there is the comfortable
majority OF 3,013. These claims be-
ing apparently irreconcilable, Post
reporter hunted up Mr. Donnelly and
propouuded few leading questions:
"Are you really in earnest" said
The Post, sin making this contest Is
there not 5000 majority in favor Of
Washburne p
"Nominally Mr.. Washburne has 3, ,0l3
majority, but that majority is only an
apparent one it was purposely swelled
TO large proportions to prevent con.
test. | received over 500 majority in
certain townships which were not ro.
turned nor counted Tor me, through u
trick Of the Republican Secretary OF
State, by which the return blanks sent
out contained no place Tor the return
Of the votes for Congressman, and
hence in many Democratic precincts
they failed to return my vote. All
this is proved, and hence Washburnc's
ostensible majority should be but q
500 and 724 OF this is made up Of
false returns, made eight days after
the election, in violation of law, for it
is well understood that when the cleo
lion officers OF precinct have, imme-
diately after the election, made their
count and return, they have no right,
week after they have dissolved, to
meet again and doctor up new re-
turns. So that deducting these votes.
Washburne's majority instead of 3,O13,
is but 1899 and this is made up by
wholesale frauds or intimidations and
bnberies." .-
"In addition to these points, what
are the other grounds of your contest2"
II show that the campaign on the
part of Mr.. Washburne was mass of
corruption; no such case has ever be-
fore been presented to Congress; over
$50, 600 was spent to secure his cleo
ton. Congress has repeatedly held
that one case of bribery will unseat u
member without regard to the size Of
his majority. / show about 243 cases
of bribery, some OF them committed
right in Washburne's Office, and the
money paid in his presence or the
presence of his brother, Cadwalader G.
Washburne. All this is proved in the
printed testimony"
"But that is your side Of the ques-
ton. What does Washburne sayp
"There is but one side to that story.
Mr.. Washburne offers no testimony to
deny, rebut or explain these charges I;
they stand confessed on the record.
His counsel admit the payment OF
money, but claim that it was for legti-
mate election expenses"
"How is that2"
Legitimate election expenses among
the Republicans OF Minnesota means
that it is right to hire Democrats to
work for the Republican party at the
polls. They claim that if they hire a
Democrat TO use bis influence among
his friends that II Is not bribery, be.
cause nothing is said about his vote
He, of course, votes as he talks, and
the thin excuse OF paying him for his
time is supposed to cover the fraud
If Congress sustains Washburne ex.
pect to see the next Republican can.
didate for Congress in that district
advertising in the papers for 1000
Democrats TO work at the polls at So
per day. If it is right to do il pri.
vately it cannot bo wrong to do itpub-
licly."
"But il is claimed by the Republi.
cans that your evidence is all hercsay.
How is that 2"
"0ut of 243 cases Of bribery tho
evidence is heresay in only four cases
And as TO these would say that IL is
a well.settled principle Of law that the
confessions or admissions OF voter