Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-10-31
eros. Abuse Of . Public Trust.

Mr.. s. A. Waldron, Democratic candi-
date for the Assembly, in his speech at
South Pasadena on Saturday night, as
reported in the HERALD, said that County
Clerk Dunsmoor had refused, in 1886,
to register 1914 Democratic voters because
of an informality on the part of the
deputies who had enrolled their names.
Mr.. Waldron said that this was no elec-
ton clap-trap charge, for Mr.. Dunsmoor
himself had admitted under oath, in the
contest of Lynch vs.. Vandever, that he
had refused to register these names
because they we're Democrats; but that
if they had been Republicans he
would have accepted them. Mr.. Wal
dron's memory was at fault as to the
exact answer of Mr.. Dunsmoor, but his
fact is substantially correct. The history
of the transaction is briefly this: The
County Clerk had publicly notified the
electors of Los Angeles county that regis
trations would close on the I'd of October,
1886. Later in the month of October,
about the 10th or the 18th, he determined
to issue a supplemental register to be
kept open till the 9th, and said that he
had sent out notice of this extension of
time to his registry clerks, among whom
there were, as he guessed, some ten
|or twelve Democrats; but all, ex-
cepting those in Santa Ana and
in Downey, in precincts where but
a very small number of votes were
polled. 1t is matter Of history, however,
that it was not generally known that
names could be registered after the I'd
of October. About the 21st, circular
from the Republican Central Committee
fell into the hands of the Democratic
Committee, advising Republican depu-
ties to keep on enrolling voters, as
names would be received for registra-
ton by the County Clerk up to the
9th of October. This aroused
the Democrats, and they got Mr..
Bilderrain, who was the County Asses
sor, and who had the legal right to do
SO, to appoint number of Democratic
deputies to enroll names of voters (well
understood, Democratic voters, for regis
tration. The only public notice given by
Mr.. Dunsmoor that names could be
registered till the 9th, was published in
an obscure corner Of the Evening Ea-
press on the 25th and Goth of
October. The Democratic deputy's
assessors went out and enrolled
1874 names, and when they we're returned
to the County Clerks Office, Mr.. Duns-
moor made diff culties about registering
them because of the informality of the
deputies appointments not having been
fled in his Office. Hon. S. M. White,
Hon. R. F. Del Valle and another Demo-
crat interviewed Mr.. Dunsmoor, and he
promised them to place the names on the
Great Register. On the 28th of October,
however, Mr.. Dunsmoor made up his mind
not to put those names on the Great
Register, without having notified Mr..
White that he had reconsidered his
former determination. Now here comes
the animus of the City Clerk. 1t must
be remembered he was running for a
election, and that he changed his
miud about registering the 1874 names
because, as he deposed, after he had
promised Mr.. White to accept them he
saw the District Attorney, who aUas also
a candidate for reelection, and he told
him that the names had not been legally
enrolled, yet he never notified the Dep
uty Assessor or Mr.. White OF the fact.
The testimony, at page 90, Of Lynch vs.
Vandever, says:
Question-If these deputy assessors
had been Republicans, and had not filed
their appointment in your office, would you
not have notified them Of the fact, and
that any action had by them prior to the
filing of their appointments was illegal?
Mr.. Campbell Counsel for Vandever)
objected.
Question by Mr.. Roberts Counsel for
Lynch)-Would you not, sir?
Answer-Very probably / would have
notified them.
Now here Mr.. Dunsmoor admits, under
oath, that he would Every probably"
have taken different action in his ca
pacity as County Clerk with reference to
those names if they had been sent in by
Republican instead of Democratic dep
uties. In other words, he would have
notified Republican deputies that they
must file their appointments in
his Office before he would register
the names they had handed in, whilst
he in fact refused or purposely neglected
to notify the Democratic deputies.
1t is manifest that this action of the
County Clerk disfranchised for that cleo
ton the 1874 Democratic voters enrolled
by the deputy assessors, and that if they
had been Republican voters they would
have got on the supplemental register
and their votes have been polled. "a
public Office is public trust" but Mr..
Dunsmoor evidently did not go consider
IL in his case at that timn