The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1890-01-29
GEN. SPRlGG CLOSES
Ills Very Lame Argument on Behalf o
i Judge Fleming.

-
5 Judge Fleming.
Specia! Dispatch 10 The Lnietllgenecr.
CHARLESTON, W. Va, Jan. 2S.-At
2:45, the Joint Session rccouvened and
Mr.. sprigg rcsuming, said: desire TO
correct an error in my remarks. Think
the proof shows that in Braxton the
county was laid of in townships, the
names OF which were afterwards changed.
With this exception my statements
stand. No Court would require such
proof rs is asked here with regard to the
establishing OF these district lines. Sup.
pose it We're murder case, would the
Court require evidence as to district or
county lines. l want to call attention
to the cases i'll Summers county to show
you how men can differ honestly.
Here, six men are charged as non.
residents OF the county and district.
The proof shows they are negroes,
that they voted and We're not residents
Of Greene Sulphur district when they
voted. They were Republicans. As to
one, the,committee was unanimous, ex-
cept Mr.. Maxwell. AS to the other cases,
Morris aud Maxwell voted no. These
men were railroad laborers. Witnesses
testified that the men did not live there,
and have not lived there since the elec.
ton. Some came from Virginia, some
from Ohio. Ono Of the colored men
couldn't say how he voted, but "wauted
to vote for Benjamin" On this case Mr..
Morris voted with us. Mr.. Maxwell
and Mr.. Morris differed as to some
OF these votes, as. will be seen from
the minority reports. 7. L. Marshall,
foreman OF tho construction train on
which these people were employed, says
they had not been IN the State long
enough to vote. They, were employed
by the Chesapeake 4 Ohio Railroad
to so along repairing the road. 3
a.E REpELLiNG AN IMPUrATioN. e
Under the proof tho Committee was
justified in striking every one OF these
names from the list. cite this case to
repel the foul and nasty inputation that
has been cast upon me and, my brethren
OF the Democratic side of this Committee,
Our action was based ou the statute as l
read it to you. A man cannot get the
right to vote BY being in the employ OF
a corporation. He must have intended
to make that place his permanent home.
Now let us go to kanawha county.
call your attention first to the law to
show whether the majority or minority
are right (Mr. Sprigg read from the Code
With regard to the powers OF a County
Court acting as Returning Board).
want TO show that the lazy required
these ballots to be placed in the custody
OF an officer Of the law and preserved for
certain period al time. eAll The law
upon this question OF recount is collated
aud from my investigation undertake
to say that the law is laid down correctly
i'll the encyclopedia OF law of which I
have taken my position in tho majority
report. The returns were in the keep
ing Of the County Clerk, and without
proof to the contrary he is to be pre-
sumed to have done his duty. ''y
THE HANAWHA BALLOTS. +
Witness Forsythe says that while the
county court was making the recount,
he was down in the neighborhood until
about 8 O'Clock i'll the morning to sec
what was going on. Clerk Goshorn and
Phil Montague left about Z in the even.
ing. Montague. came back with papers
about the size OF ballots, laid them on a
table and ior an hour and a half was en-.
gagged in@ examining them. He got up
and stopped up a crack in the window
blinds. q Montague was employed by
Goshorn as an assistant. He says further
he told this story to George w. Patton.
This man Forsythe sticks to this story oI
what he saw through the window. He
leaves the impression that Montague was
tampering with the ballots. He reported
to George W. Patton, who is an attorney
OF General Goff's in this case. What
does Patton say? In his testimony he
tells what Forsythe told him about bis
visit to the Clerks office, and the two
statements do not agree in essential mar.
ticulars. Observe that Patton says that
to the best OF his recollection Forsythe
never told him about Montague working
with the ballots. Tho whole case rests
on this man Forsythe, and be is con,
tradicted by Patton. an.
MIR. Hubbard told you that il be coulf
show that the majority report was false
or misleading in one particular it wa!
false in toto. Apply that rule here. ;,
& DlscRED1TlNd WITNESSES. 4. +
II have been able by the testimon,
to show you that the testimony reliet
on is false in one particular, haven't
the right to ask you to say it is false il
every particular? Iwould be willing te
rest the case here, but I can 80 further
Here are the others who have testitiee
in this matter. The law desiguates tht
officer who shall take care OF these bal
lots, and you must presume that he ha,
done his duty. The burden OF proof j.
on those who attack him. I quote from
his testimony in (which he shows that til.
Office was not entered and the ballots wer,
not tampered with. He also denies tha
he tampered with the ballots, Forsyth,
is shown by every witness to be utterl,
unreliable. Montague is shown not tt
have been In the office except when b,
was copying deed for Mr.. Edwards
another counsel for Gen. Goff. NJ Th,
suspicious circumstances arc against th,
other side. have not gone over one
fourth of This case, but l must close
4 Before i take my seat l want to thnnl
you one and all for the attention 70,
have paid to the feeble attempt I hay'