Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1884-02-26
Mai. John W. Daniel in the O'Ferrall Paul
Contest


Mai. John W. Daniel in the OFerrall-Paul
Contest.
The argument before the subcommittee
in the contested election case Of O'Ferrall
and Paul was concluded by Maj. John W.
Daniel last Friday. Edgar Allen was the
counsel for Paul, and Hon. John T. Harris
and Maj John W. Daniel for O'Ferrall.-
The Washington correspondent of the
Richmond Dispatch thus speaks of Major
Daniels Argument
After recess Cat o'clock Major Daniel
commenced his argument of an hour and a
half, and spoke with clesrnsss, earnestness,
and ability. He said it was contest be-
tween O'Ferrall and a vacant chair, for
nal majority of 204, had exercised judicial
acumen and accepted Federal judgeship.
If there was vacancy, the Governor, at the
last general election, would have, under the
law, ordered an election in the Seventh
congressional district. In the beginning
he paid his respects to Senator Malone,
whom he designated as the assignee ir bank
ruptcy of the Republican party Of Virginia,
and asked what right had he, senator of
the United States. to devise financial sys-
tenn, under pretence that the statute war
ranted it, to aid his party in carrying an
election? The most usual fraud, he said, is
where the law is followed in form but the
substance is not there. When the commit
tee shall read the testimony they will see,
he declared, that there was a deliberate
conspiracy not to collect revenue-for the
personal-prOperty list was not given these
pretended -collectors-but to help the
Coalition party. In pursuance of this con-
spiracy 117ct Electors were, he said, appoint
ed, all of one party. These collectors ap-
pointed numerous deputies in every county
in Albemarle, for example, twenty-six,
and in Augusta, twenty-all Coalitionsts
except one, who was appointed through
mistake. County by county Major Daniel,
with great clearness, showed in detail cases
of fraud practiced by the collectors and de-
puties. He declared that the records show
ed that, admitting even that these collec-
| tors were authorized by law, which was not
the case, that there was enough fraud
shown by the testimony to more than over
come Paul's nominal majority. He took up
the county of Albemarle, and called special
attention to the fact that Collector Way
land gave out SIG fraudulent tax receipts,
|
| He read from the South Carolina case of
Tillman and Small to show that the testi-
mony was taken, as in this case, to show
that the colored people voted the Republi-
can ticket and tie whites the Democratic.
New Jersey, California, and other election
cases were quoted in support of this char
acter of testimony. He then referred to
the johnson and Knight case, which Mr..
Allan had quoted, and showed that this
same doctrine was maintained by the Dem
ocratic committee which reported ON chat
case to the Virginia Legislature. Tho at
| tention of the committee was called to the
testimony of Bennett, Gordon, Yates, and
other deputy collectors in Albemarle, who
said they were instructed to give no receipts
to voters they did not feel satisfied would
vote for Paul and John 8. Wise. In fact,
I the current of testimony in all the counties,
he said, was that the collectors and deputies
followed this rule. This is the only mode
of proof, he contended, because there were
"a, 900 votes polled in the Seventh district,
and it would be impossible to summon each
and ask him how he voted. If the capita
tion-tax was not paid before election day,
man under the law had no right to vote,
Yet Wayland, the Albemarle collector,
testified that he issued enough tickets, with
out collecting the money for them until af
ter the election, to give O'Ferrall a major
ity in the district. lie called attention to
the testimony which showed that tax-re-
ceipts were issued in Fluvanna and Gooch-
land by these collectors ON election-day, and
was not dry on them. He explained, in
| reply to member Of the committee, the
laws against paying capitation-taxesfo for 9th
ers and issuing blank tax-receipts If the
system shown to have been pursued by
these collectors and deputies does not prove
bribery, corruption, and violation of law,
then, Major Daniel said, neither can be
proven in any election.
Major Daniel explained the plan of opera
ton in giving out these illegal tax receipts
to Coalition voters, which is familiar to Vir-
ginians, but which must have been new to
most of the committee. While he comment
ed on this branch ofthe case the committee,
as all through his entire argument, paid the
closest attention to every word he uttered.
His illustrations just here were most point
ed. He contended that upon no theory can
it BIZ shown that O'Fcrrall is not entitled to
the seat. He mentioned that if the Gov
ernor had ordered an election last fall o. Fer
rail- would have been elected, as the Demo-
Gratis carried the district by over 1890.
In the course of his argument Major
Daniel explained the goth section, under
which Auditor Allen claimed authority to
appoint collectors, and made it perfectly
clear that be had not the slightest right to
do so. He made it also clear that collectors
mentioned in that section are city collectors,
just as sergeants are city sergeants. He
showed, too, that the 34th section referred
to officers who, having collected taxes, were
in arrears. Judge Harris had already argu-
ed with marked effect this branch of the
case.
From present indications the Mahoneites
will not e hble up and walk away with all
the white Republicans in the State. The
names of Lieut.. Gov. Lewis, Mr. Rives, Mr..
Wickham, Mr.. Dezendorf, Mr.. Mckenzie,
and of nearly all the old, we'll known and
respected Republicans Of the State, are
conspicuonsly absent from the list of those
who were parti, to general Mahone's con-
ference la week. The friends of those
gentlem Il are the authority for the state
ment that they will patiently submit no
lon ger to the tyran GUS domination OF a
Democratic scalawag, and that being the
tru- representatives of the true Republicans
| in Virginia, thew will represa IT. thair mart