Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-02-23
4 ILLEGAL" IDIOT.


The Special Pleading and Legal Nonsense
Of Wsshburn's Organ.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Whatever otherwise may be the merits of
the Donnelly- Washburn contested election
case, think every lawyer will agree that the
long legal article in this Saturday morn
ing's Pioneer Press is nuddle of wordy
sophistry. The writer assumes his conclu-
sions without any premises, and studiously
evades the real issues, if, indeed, he really
understands them. 1t would be charitable
to presume his ignorance, for no one with
self respect, it seems to me, could knowingly
so insult the intelligent portion of the com
munity by attempting to palm of such trans
parent nonsense for legal ar ument.
First, he avoids the issue of bribery.
Washburn is charged with bribery, and this
legal luminary's organ, a few days ago,
stated that only ten voters had been bribed
according to the report of the sub-commit-
tee. If he bribed one,-he or his friends,
with his knowledge,-he should be kicked
out OF Congress. A man who buys vote is
unworthy to hold any Office. His proper
place would be the penitentiary.
But as to the numbered ballots. This
writer says; ''the validity of the numbered
ballots is thus doubly entrenched and for
titled: first by the fundamental right of the
voter to have his honest vote counted,
irrespective of any technical errors
by the judges in the mode of receiving
it, and second, by his fundamental right to
determine for himself whether his ballot
shall be secret or MOTTO enforce or waive
his personal privilege of a secret ballot"
This kind of stuff in common parlance
has been called Fundamental" hiohfalu!en
it is 80 high it is difficult to reach it. Sim
mered down, and with froth taken off, it is
| an absolute admission of the correctness of
Donnelly's position, and what is perhaps
| still more gratifying, a declaration that the
decision of the supreme court of Minnesota
was probably right. This in itself is great
concession from this "marver' of logician.
Because if the voter has all these rights, it is
absolutely time that he was deprived of them
when his ballot was numbered, and open
to the inspection of the judges
of elections, and to his employer, enc Of the
| candidates. Such was the fact in Minneapo-
lis. The voter had no choice, no free will,
no privilege of q secret ballot. If ten thou
| sand illegal statutes were on the book, acts
| under them would be void. But says the le-
gal editor. the voter had the right to waive
the unconst!tutionality of the law -''if they
| Uhe voters; are satisfied no one else has the
right to complain" That is to say candi
| date defeated by illegal voting has no right
to complain. This is the sum aud substance
| of it, because any restrictions on the right
of suffrage, any violation of the secrecy of
the ballot, any intimidation of the voter
is illegal, and all the
| waters CT all the oceans could never wash
out the faint of fraud from that vote, max
| ing it null and void.
The constitution Of Minnesota, art. VII,
Sec 5, says: "All elections shall be by BAL
| LOT, except for such town officers as may be
directed by law TO be otherwise chosen" l
| suppose that The constitution is the organic
| law, and must govern. If SO, the only way
of voting in Minnesota, subject to the excep-
ton, is by ballot. The ballot means secrecy.
This secrecy was openly violated at Mime
apolis, in the face of recent decision of all
| the judges of the district court
of Ramsey county, and of
what every lawyer knew would
be the decision Of the Republican supreme
court of the State. 1t is only applicable by
recurring to the original purpose of this Re-
publican special legislation applying to only
two towns or cities in the whole State, and
| that purpose was to prevent Democratic
| frauds in Ramsey county, and to legalze
Republican frauds in Minneapolis.
l can't take up more OF your space with
this "marvel of impudence.'' There is
nothing tangible in the two columns to take
hold of. can not conclude, however, with
out saying that no man ever uttered threats
| and no man was ever afraid of them.
The cry of Outrage" Infamous 81
and so on, has no terrors for the Democratic
party, considering the source. What has
| the Republican party ever hesitated to do?
Did it ever pause even in the presence of
| the majesty of the constitution when party
interests were at stake? Is there any out
rage it has not committed? Did it ever
Democrats out of Congress? From the time
it convulsei the country by the impeachment
of Andrew johnson down to the ostracism
of the hero and veteran Gen. Shields, from
the time it robbed cities, States, freedmen,
pensioned soldiers, Indians and the govern
ment underGrant down to the climax of fraud
that defeated the will of O majority of the
people of the United States and stole the
I ItSlucuCv.
challenge the history of the country, and
the history of parties in it, for comparison
with the patriotic action of the Democratic
majority in the present Congress. The
House has voted the appropriations; the
Senate has confirmed, scarcely without a
murmur, the appointees of Hayes Look at
the action of the Senate on Johnson's ap-
pointees for contrast. Go back to Jack
sons time, Van Buren,. and, I believe,
Chief Justice fancy, were both re-
jected for the mission to England, and
under John Tyler there was almost
| deadlock. Reverse the case of Donnelly-
Washburn, and put the Republicans in
power, and Donnelly would not hold his seat
twenty-four hours. l have written more
than I intended, the subject cannot be ez-
hausted. Farewell to the legal editor.
As Scion said to one in judgment weak,
thought the wise until heard the speak.
OSCAR STEPHENSON.
st. Paul, Mimi, Feb. 81.
The Shooting of Gen. Nelson.