Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-10-22

w. Johnson'and DR.. Keith, (the postmaster
of Minneapolis, and the same party who
thanked Charles Berens for his offer to sell
his support to Washburn for S50). johnson
wanted Cloutier to go out and eleetioneer for
Washburn. Oioutier said he would do soi
he was paid for his time and expenses.
rhereupon Johnson told him to start out
The next day Johnson met Cloutier at the
postofice ands paid him thirty dollars. The
following Wednesday Cloutier met johnson
again at Washbarn's office. II told him l.
wanted some more money. he asked me
how much I wanted and told him wanted
twenty dollars. BE, [lHr. Jotnson,1 vsnt
into the nert room and commenced talking
UiA Mr.. WdshburI,, The sitting anenaber1.
He came back and handed ne ttcenty Gol-
lars"
The witness, Cloutier, states in his cross
examination that no was III favor of Mr.
Washb0rn IL the first Place; but it appears
by his examination Ia. chief that he had
made up his mind TO take no part in the elee-
ton, because he had beeu previously prom
issd brlbes which were not paid; and there
upon be was paid $50 to convert him from
that position Of neutrality aud Indifference
into warm supporter of the sitting mem.
Der. In ether woros, the payment Of that
sum of money secured TO Mr.. Washburn o
support and influence which he would not
have had without it. Il is fair to presume
that if the vote and support Of this metce-
nary politician could have been had without
the payment of the money, the $50 would
not have been paid.
The contract Of bribery was made by the
secretary of Washburn's committee In Wssh-
burns Office, and part of the money was paid
in Washburn's Office in his presence, and un-
der circumstances which create strong pre-
sumption that it came from Washburn's
pocket. That is to say, Oioutier asks John
son for 500; Johnson goes to WashbuTn and
returns with the money and pays i: 20 Ciou
tier.
CONVINCING PROOF.
Here, then, we have four cases OF bribsfy,
involving So hribed votes, brought home to
the sitting member In ths cearest snd most
conclusive manner. Ia tho first case the ne
gotistion is with Mr.. Washburn himself in
the next, the money which bought the votes
is repaid in his tWash5arn's) Office BY his
business manager in the third, the br be Is
offered aud the money paid In Washburn's
Office by his business manager and in the
presence OF his bro, her; and in the fourth
case, the bribe is offered and the money pald
by the secretary OF W&shburn's committee
Ia Washburu's Office, and part Of the lno1.y
paid!n Washburn's Office, and probably out
Of his pocket. 1t seems. to your committee
that this evidence Is sufficient to convict Mr.
WashbUrn of bribery in any court in the
world.
And yet in the face Of such an array of
testimony Mr. Washburn is dumb. He had
forty days In which to rebut this testimony;
ne could have taken the stand himself, to ex-
plain or deny the Berens matter; he could
have procured the testimony of his business
manager, Hale, to contradict Shagren and
Morton; he could have called johnson TO
contradict Cloutier; he could have sworn his
brother, Ex-Governor @. @. Washburn, to
deny that he was present and conferred with
Hale, and also to rebut the natural presump-
ton that be, 70. Q. Washburn), furnished tie
S6 with which Hale bribsd Shagren. He die
nothing of this kind; he denied nothing; be
called not single witness to rebut this or
anything else in the mass of testimony shos
Ing bribery. Certainly no lawyer, and no lny-
man miliar with human nature, will pre-
tend that it was MIR. DonneIly's DUTY to place
these parties who held such close and init.
mate relations with Mr. Washburn on the
witness stand. He might Just as we'll be-
asked to make Mr.. Washburn his witness
In these matters be and his friends were like
the Siarless twins, living, breathing, and
moving together. 1t will not do for Mf
Washburn to say that he did not wish {.
dignity the case of the contestant by ca::
Ing witnesses in reb1ttal. His own charac.c,
as man of homer demanded some denial e.
OF this testimony. which trsc, s
the bribery of 96 voters right to his own o..
fee, to his business manager, to his brother,
and to himself. If he did not consider biz
own reputation affected by such charges, b.
at least owed ii to his constituents, and to
the Congress of the United States, to prov.
that he had not gained sect Ia the Hous:
BY unworthy, dishonorabIe, and crimipsi
practices.
Having failsd to rebut this evidence by
counter testimony, the presumption Of lae
becomes conclusive that he did not do 30 be-
cause he could not do SO. He comedies
thereby the truth of every statement made
oy contestants witnessesj and his siiencs is
an admission of his guilt. It is a we'll un-
1erstood principle Of law that admissions Of
guilt "may be implied from acquiescence cf
Of the party, whether It be acguiesceree Ii
Lhe conduct or language Of another" (Gren-
leaf on Evidence, vol. !, sec. 81 and see.
1879 "lf material adverment, we'll plsad-
ed, is passed over by the adverse party, with.
out denial, whether it be by confession, or b,
pleading some other matter, or by demurring
N law, 1t is thereby conclusively admitted
.I6id sec. 27.) And In this case the failure
TO rsbRt or impeaoh the testimony of these
witnesses es to bribery, is confession OF
he truth of their statements and of the guilt
Of the party.
Your committee have dweIt at length UP
On these four cases, because they reach home
directly to the sitting member; but they con-
'titute but small part of the testimony
showing bribery.
The report then proceeds at great length
% cite numerous other cases Of bribery
Ehich were proven against Washburn. These
include the famous negotiation for an editor
with Nat. RichardsoR, of Little Falls,
he unblushing purchase of Emil Shack,
.he president of Democratic Scandinavian
club, and numerous other damnable in
stances. The comm ittee then summarize as
follows:
WHERE MONEY Was PAID.
7ssnsher, OF lis business manager or the clerk
Ykts Congressional committee, or sons friend
aadthe parties Soted for ths stttiag raen.t.r:
As the wood camp at Tamaraek river, 90
wood choppers and trappers, totsl. ...... 90
Webster and White. the contractors, - 9
Bernard Cioutier.
hallrosd hands at WORK st round house
Crooksten Polk county. 35
Rsfiroad haRds who came to Crookstoa cn
n.-nu cahn 80 .'.'-''. ''.t't.i.s...,..... u
HallroRd hands who voted at Crookston with
Johnson ..,:.-,..',, .',,.,.i......,,,.,. II
Railroad hands Who voted at Two Rivers. "a
Balancs of o. NJ. Robbins railroad hands
who vote st Tanarack river.
j. z Brewer and the men he bribed, to-wit;
George Geissei, Thomas kittowski and
Wm. III. Leyde.
Henry Monroe.
Abraham Werriek-