New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-03-29
A REMARKABLE DOCUMENT.
THE LADORED Z" REPORT" WHICH Is TO BE UsEI
TO LE6IsIATE MR.. wAsHBURN OUT OF HIS SEAT.


markable piece of literature that emanacd
from a committee of the House of Representatives
is what purports to be the Report of the Commit
tee on Elections in the contested election case of
Donncy versus Washburn in the Hid Congressional
District of Minnesota" The impudence of the
attempt to steal the seat of Republican member
who was elected by more than 5000 majority is
fairly matched by the cool cfronteIy and mlsrepre-
sentatiOD of this precious document. Common
rumor points to Mr.. Manning as the author of
this report; but a carciul study of the work
plainly reveals the fact that the master hand and
mind of Ignatus Donnely have left their impress
every page and nearly every sentence. One
stnmbles constantly upon the conclusions and often
the very language of that piebald demagogue.
1t is no wonder that Mr.. Clark and Mr.. Speer
refused to sign report which i'll some instances
fasifes and in many cases mlsrepTesents the
record of the testimony. The wonder is that any
body, even Democratic Congressman, should
consent to sign it. A brief review of this document
VIII be of interest showing the desperate straits
TO which the Democrats reduced in their at
tempt practically to disfranchse about 81 600 Re-
publican voters IN Minnesota.
About One-half of the report " is devoted to ac-
cusations of bribery. The first case discussed is
that of one Charles Berens, a Democrat, and also i
postmaster Mr. Berens swore that he wrote a
letter to Mr.. Washburn and offered TO support him
the letter; and that he did receive letter from
Mr.. Keith, of Minneapolis. expressing qualification
to know that he would work for Washburn, and
telling him to confer with Mr. Brewer, a Republi-
can who was managing Mr.. Washburns cam
paign in the vicinity where Berens lived
Mr. Berens further testified that he not offered
OF promised, did ne ever receive, any money
from any one in Mr.. Washbnrn's behalf; and that |
he did not know of any money being paid or |
mseh hv
by any person acting for him with his |
knowledge to any person persons for the vote or
Influence of such persons. Mr. Berens also
frankly testified that he had supported Donnelly
for Congress- aud that he himself was the only
man he knew who had tried to corrupt a candidate
for Congress by demanding money as the price of
his support
Mr.. Blower swore pOint-bank that he never Of
fered or paid Mr. Berens anybody else a dollar
for corrupt political purposes and that he did not
know of any money other corrupt influence being
used by anybody TO secure votes for
NJ. Washburn. Mr. Brewer was active IN
Mr.. Washburn's behalf. and canvassed a
number of counties. The report itself says that
the testimony of Berens and Brewer stands unim-
peached and yet in the face and eyes of this over
whelning testimony. which is confessed to be true,
the author of the report" calmly sums up the mat
ter as follows:
Il. Berens tells Washburn that he will sell him
his vote for $50. 2. Washburn thanks him and
tells him t. 20 ahead and it viii be all right"
In the list of "bribed" voters made by the author
of the report appear the name of Daaiel Getcil-
ell, who swOre that he voted for Donnelly.
The report says Getchell admits that he received
money for bis services at the election, but claims
that it was not from Mr.. Washburn and
that he voted for Mr.. Donney. He refuses
TO tell who paid him. Now, If one will tarn to he |
testimony he will ind that the witness did not ,
admit that he received any money from anybody
but swOrc pont-bank that neither Mr. Washburn
any of his friends approached him. with or |
without money. and asked his vote or influence.
One witness, Emil Shagren. sworc that Getcbel
told him that he had received 500 to vote for Mr. !
Washblra. Getchell swOre that he never told
Shagren any such thing. This man Shagren was one
OF Donnelly's most copious and fluent Witnesses
in spite Of the fact that Shagrens testimony is i'm
peached by credible men, it is the sole evidence 4
upon which the names of at least four persons are 3
included in the lis. of ''brbed" voters found in 7
the Donnclly Manning report" I
A man by the name of Bernard Clautiar received I
some money from the Republican Campaign Commit 0
fer hssevices and expenses while on an election
eoing tour in behalf of the Republican ticket. T
The report puts this down as a case Of bri- I
berry," and says moreover, that part of The money
was paid to Mr. Clautier in Mr. Washburn's pres
ence aud that it. "probably' came I" out of the l
pocket" of that gentleman. This statement is y
twice repeated. but there is not an ioa of violence
TO support it. q
To conclude this branch of the subject il NAV II
be said in broad terms that there ia no evidence 10
sustain single of the allegations of bribery
made against Mr. Washburn although the re
por. contains list footing up 3Of cases in which -
II is claimed that voters were brbed by Mr. Wash r
burn and his agents. a
Repeatedly where The testimony Of witnesses il n
nj IN Of
ing conclusion 1t will be found that the express su
sion the witness teses" its equivalent is sed ii
until point is reached where, examination ~
something unfavorable to Donnelly came our. er I
Right here the witness ceases to testify" III the m
language of the report" He only pretends" do
after that.
The next accusation is intimidation of voters
Nine pages OF the report are devoted to this
man ought TO be- able to discourse eloqnentlv
and earnedly; bat even Mr.. Manning must have an
beeR2tartled by discovery which he appears to Sc,
bay made at the very outset. He, Mr.. Donnely @
or him, had already shown to his satisfaction n
hat certain railroad employees who voted al Crooks u
Mr. Msung Vqse hs bGs SonSs and Now
'age sixteen of this unique "reportp proceeds / ia
o show that these same railroad hands were ':n- Ia,
10 wonder then that Sir. Manning thinks that clio
oters ought to be dsfraDchised who before voting ho
md after they have been brbed" have to be lin
how that any man was ntmidated. bee
The report" contains laborious argument mo,
iade 10 show tbat the numbering of ballots in | No
minneapolis was part of the scheme TO intimdafe
oters cut
The claim that because ballots were numbered the
orkingmen OF Minneapolis dared not vote is an con
lat only the election judges and a few Won
her persons knew anything about the Yea Yea
Imberng. And yet Mr. Manning abors through nae ae
lge after page, twisting testimony and Quoting err
mpaign literature from Mr.. Donney's personal that