The Rock Island Argus., 1882-05-27
THE DEADLOCK.
The Reason Why the Democrats Oppose the
Macksy-O Conner Case.
Washington Special.

the mouse, MT. OdlElIS, OF l0dldHa, caifGd
up the contested election case of Mackey
against O'Conner, from the Second con-
gressional district of South Carolina. As
already stated, the democrats raised ques-
ton of consideration preferring to go on
with the regular business of the house, and
on the vote to proceed with the election
case refused to vote, and broke quorum
1t appeared that the republicans had not a
present to constitute quorum, and yes
terday was lost in futile efforts to find
absentees in favor of proceeding with the
election case At $50 O'Clock, however,
Mr.. Calkins despaired of obtaining quo
| rum of his own friends, and moved that
the house adjourn, which motion was i'm
mediately carried He gave notice, how
ever, that on Monday he would call up the
case again, and hoped by that time to
have quorum in the House in favor of
| proceeding with it. The position of the
Democrats in reference to this case is
stated by Congressman Springer as follows:
There was caucus of Democrats. held in
the hall of the House of Represe natives,
on Thursday afternoon, May Is, at which
resolution was adopted simply declaring
that the adjudication of the case upon the
/ testimony now filed would be an outrage
upon sitting members, etc. This resolution
did not state all that was tacitly agreed to
| in the caucus. There was universal under
! standing that Democrats would resist by
dilatory motions the taking up of this case
or the consideration of it upon the evi-
dence whichis now presented. There was
| some difference as to whether the case
| should proceed to discussion before dila-
tory motions were resorted to, but a
majority were of the opinion that its con-
| sideration should be resisted from the
beginning The grounds for this course are.
| from a democratic standpoint, as follows:
At the election in November, 1880, Mr..
Mackey was the republican candidate, and
| Mr. O'Connor was the democratic candi-
| date, and the latter was returned as elected
| by majority of over 5000. Mr.. Mackey
gave notice of contest. Mr. OConnor was
then a member of congress, and desired to
remain in Washington until the 4th of
March before going on with the taking of
testimony. Hence an agreement was en-
tered into that the testimony might be
taken out of time or beyond the time
fequired by law, and as agreed to by the
respective parties After the 4th of March
the taking of evidence was begun, but on
April Goth, 1881, Mr. O'Connor died
The governor called special cleo
ton, which was held June 9th, 1881,
at which Samuel Dibble, the pres
ent sitting member was elected, the
republicans making no contest After Mr.
o Connor's death the contest was proceed
ed with by Mackey up to the time of the
special election, he having the taking of
testimony entirely in his own hands. All
the evidence taken, both by Mr.. Mackey
and Mr.. O'Connor. was in his custody, and
some of it was not returned to Washington
until long after the special election. After
the evidence was printed, Mr.. Dibble dis
covered that it was of most extraordinary
character and Immediately proceeded to
examine the original manuscript. 1t must
be remembered that M. Dibble was never
party in the contest between Mackey and
O'Connor so far as the taking of evidence
is concerned, and took no notice of the
case until after congress met and the com
mittee on elections were proceeding to con-
slider it. Upon examining the manuscript
forwarded Mr.. Dibble discovered that
it was uot the evidence which
was originally taken in the
case, and Immediately presented memoir
al to the House asking that the intcrline
ations, erasures, and suppression of cvi-
dence be investigated. This was referred
to the committee on elections. and that com
mittee refused to consider Mr.. Dibble's pc
tition. He presented numerous afIidavits
before the committee in support of his
statement, notably that of Mr. Hogarth,
who was the notary public before whom
the evidence was taken, and of Mr. c..
Smith, a copyist employed by Mr.. Mackey,
who was also a republican supervisor of
elections and one of Mr.. Mackeys wit
nesses, together with several other affida-
Wits From these and other indisputable
evidence appearing by the record itself,
Messrs. Moulton, of Illinois, and Atherton,
of Ohio, members of the committee on
elections, summed up the facts as
they appeared, which was conclusively
established, as follows: The depositions of
the contestant, with one or two
exceptions, were taken before e. I'll.
Hogarth who was stenographer,
as well as a notary public All
of the testimony taken before this notary
except three or four depositions were
transcribed from the stenographic notes,
in his own handwriting, and delivered to
the contestant These dispositions SO
taken before and written out by the notary
wsre never forwarded to the house. They
are not now or never have been on file,
either IN this committee or in the house.
Some of these dep6sitions were burned, and
some of them were torn up by the contest
ant. The rest were retained, or otherwise
disposed of by him. In place of these
dispositions, the contestant sent to the
house certain papers written by himself
and his agents, which papers are now in
the custody of this committee, and have
been printed as the contestants depo-
sitions in this Case The method adopted
by the contestant in the preparation of
these papers was this: He took the despo-
sitions in the handwriting of Mr. Hogarth,
and remodeled them by interlineations, by
erasures, by cutting out portions of the
original sheets, and either omitting such
portions altogether or substituting other
sheets in their stead, by erasing sometimes
nearly a whole page at once, and
by inserting entire pages in the
handwriting of the contestant, of which
there was no original in the dispositions
written by Mr. Hogarth. The interlnea-
tions were in the handwriting of the con-
testant. The contestant delivered the most
of the dispositions so remodeled TO G.
Smith, who wrote them over. including all
interllneations and insertions, and exclud-
ing.all erasures. Some of the dispositions
so replaced we've burned and others torn