Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1884-08-28
CAMPBELL's DEFENSE.
The Charges of Ordway
taken UP and Con-
sidered.
a Clear RcfutatiOn by the United
States Attorney Of the
Allegations Pre-
scntcd.

Office of United States Attorney,
Yankton, Dakota, August 25, 1884 Hon.
benjamin Harris Brewster, Attorney
General-Sir: Tho investigation into
the charges preferred to the administra.
tion against me by Messrs. Ordway and
Hughes, has been reduced by the test1-
mony to single inquiry, as to whether
| was justified by the facts and the law
IN submitting to grand jury the testi.
mony relating to the alleged acts of
bribery and corruption on the part of
Ordwsy, in the organization of new
counties.
The charge that Crdway makes is, hat
III doing 80 l was actuated by q spirit of
malice, and further, that 1 was the
prime originator ard instigator of these
charges against Ordway.
This issue, which, l repeat, is the o.ly
one LETT out OF the series OF charges
made by Ordway against me, as it in.
cludes an inquiry into the fact, whether
there was existing in this territory be-
fore the investigation by the grand Jury,
state OF facts, and Of public sentiment
based on these facts, which demanded O
judicial investigation into the charges
against Ordway, is one which concerns
tho people of the territory as well as
myself personally.
For if such facts and public sentiment
did exist, then there was no malice on
my part in causing the inquiry before
the grand jury, aud l could not have
been the lnstigator and originator of
these facts and this public sentiment, az.
IN fact, every one knows l was not.
10 this extent the issue becomes o
matter OF public interest and not solely
personal to me.
For if such facts did exist, and if the
public sentiment was aroused by them
and did demand judicial investigation
then l stood IN the same position tow
ards that case, as | would to any other
case, IN which similar facts and similar
demand existed; and the only remaining
question would be, had l as LAWYER
sufficient legal grounds to believe, and
did believe, that the courts had iurls.
dlctlon OF the facts, as charged, by indi.
vlduals, and in the public press, and as
disclosed by the testimony before the
grand jury? If 80, then it was matter
OF sound discretion with me as q public
officer; and in the exercise of that dis
cretlon could not Justly be chargeable
with malice.
This phase of the case comes sQuarely
before the administration; for if sucf
fact and such sentiment existed, ther
the public had rights in the premises as
to such Investigation. which they have q
right to ask the administration to pass
upon.
With this view. I have thought il
proper, the investigation having CLOSED
and the testimony oil taken, to present
to you further statement of the result
OF the investigation us disclosed by the
evidence taken before the examiners
Messrs. Boteler and Halght, in addition
to that which filed with these gentle
men at Washington.
ORDwAYs CHARGES.
| The charges made by Governor Ord
three classes:
LIST class: These that charge me will
personal dishonesty and corruption i,
the administration of my office.
I'd class: Those that charge me will
mismanagement and carelessness in th
administration of my office.
Sd class: Those that charge me wit
!. being the instigator and mover OF th
charges of corruption against Ordway
and with being actuated by malice i,
bringing the charges before the gran,
jury; and with having iuterfered illegal
, ly in the constitution of the grand Jury
The first group of charges which were
preferred by Mr.. Ordway and MI
Hughes over their own signatures
: embrace three specifications:
First. A specification that charged
me with making false account O
mileage in 1882 and 1888;
Second. Aspecifcation A that charge,
j me with corruption and dishonesty, il
granting to my partner a subpoena for
witness ut the expense of the Unite,
States, in civil case, in which my part
ner and myself were interested, for ou
, joint profit.
Third. A specification which charged
me with corruptly dismissing a Grim
lnal prosecution against Robert Cox.
/. The above are the only charges, in
, series of three successive lists Of charge
made by Ordway and Hughes durin
the period of over month, embracing
50 specifications, which impute to m
: any dishonesty or corrupt action.
: They are, therefore, the gravest an
most serious Of the charges. They are
the most important to me. because the
affect my personal character.
Now, to support these charges, nelthe
Ordway nor Hughes attempted to offe
solitary particle of evidence.
Ihe examiners therefore told me tha
it was not necessary for me to adduc
any evidence rebutting the third spec
tication of these charges, and the frs
they announced as dlsproved, by thei
own personal examination.
, The second was dlsproved entirel
and no attempt was made to prove til
charge rs it stands, or any dishonest,
!, I declined to let the matter stand j
this way, and insisted upon meeting til
; charges and having them investigated
and I did meet them by positive an
direct testimony showing them to b
each and severally, wholly and indispr
? tably false; and, further, showing tha
!, there was not even the slightest groun
for such charges.
Ordway and Hughes by refusing I
offer any testimony to support then
practically abandoned them and col
fessed that these charges were grounc
Z less aud false.
n Now, then, the pertinent and mat,
rial inquiry which arises, is this:
For what purpose did Ordwny nn
Hughes thus manufacture. and preser
/. to the department, in the gravest an
;. most serious accusations that they mad
/. against me, accusations which the
!. stand as oonfessing to have been who'll
d false, without ground. and consequent
8 reckless and malicious?
l here assert thnt the motive {
Hughes and Ordway in thus manuiac
uring charges which were false, an
Y which they must have known to be falls
i-or else they would have adduced SON