The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-10-10
The DONNELLY-W ASHBURN CAM
PAIGN OF 1878.
The Report Of the Committee on
Elections of the House.
THREE HUNDRED AND FOUR
CASES OF BRIBERY.
Bulldozing and Intimidation Of
Workingmen.
Loren Fletcher, Charley johnson,
Major Hale and Other Not
ables Mixed Up in 1t
CONTINUED


Another Saint Paul party, John
Curry, %. 22), admits the receipt of
$25 from Il Republican candidate for a
local Office, Estate senate to work at
the polls and peddle Republican tick
cts. He pretends to have voted for
Donnelly.
Christian Hcyer, Democratic Ger
man farmer, of Alton, Washington
county, testilies, (p. "a, printed testi-
mony, y that he was paid ten dollars by
Warren Getchel, a republican politi-
clan, and particular friend of the sit
ting member. Getchel asked him if
he could support Washburn. Witness
said he would. Getchel said he was
"a particular friend of Washburn,"
and "he wanted me to help all l could;
he asked me if there were any debts
on our German church, and that after
election he would hand me ten dollars
to use for what purpose we thought
beSt-I could do with it as / had a
mind He does not know what the
cOnsiderat was for the ten dollars.
They have large German population
at Alton, about half Democrats. He
worked and voted for Was hburn.
TOlef G. Fladeland, of Sank Center,
Stearns county. merchant, testifies,
Up. 22l. printed testimony that he
was paid twenty dollars by Mr. Coop
er, chairman of the Republican coun-
ty committee of Stearns county, to go
out and peddle Democratic and Re-
publican tickets with Washburn's
name on them. He told Cooper that
he was not a politician; doesn't know
but he expressed himself in favor of
Mr.. Donnelly during the campaign.
AT the time Cooper paid him the
twenty dollars he was neutral as be-
tween Donnelly and Washburn. He
visited two or three towns: used his
own team; was gone one day; expenses
one dollar: profits nineteen dollars.
The testimony of Nathan Richard
son. OF Little Falls, Morrison county,
Up. 1851, leading Republican and poll
tlclan by trade, shows that the editor
of the Democratic paper at. that place
was bought up to support Washburn:
that the sum paid was proba bly,
$l2O, Up. $3.50: that it came from Mime
apolis, from Loren Fletcher. an acti,e
friend of the sitting member and promir-
ent Republican, Up. Az; and that after
the payment of that sum the said
newspaper supported Washburn and
denounced Donnelly. Tile witness
Richardson, who conducted the sale of
this Democrat and his newspaper,
supported WaShburn, made a canvass
of the county in his behalf, spent $25.
lie admits the payment of s. to Will
liam Witherall; he did not expect to
be repaid: thinks whitehall voted for
Washburn; he also paid 50 or So to a
man named Sloan: money has not been
repaid: thinks Sloan voted for Wash
burn
1t will be observed that in nearly
every one of these cases of bribery
committed throughout a region Of
country half as large as the state of
New York, the money paid is traced
back to the city of Minneapolis, the resi-
dencc OF the sitting member. From
THIS point as common center, the
corruption radiated in all directions
over the district; and when we come
to Minneapolis all the testimony
shows that it was a very hotbed Of
the cases proven:
named A. NJ. Schaak, Scandinavian.
was publishing Scandinavian news
paper in Minneapolis during the cam
paign and supported Donnelly for con-
gress up to the night before election:
that he was announced to speak at
scandinavian Democratic meeting at
Minneapolis in favor of contes tant,
Donnelly. Instead Of speaking for
Donnelly, he came out strongly for
Nashburn, and the next day lie adj
mitted to witness that he had been
paid $loO for doing so. He had new
suit of clothes and a pocket full of
money. There was no attempt to CON
tradlct the witness: in fact, counsel
for the contestee, in their cross-exam-
lnation. seem to argue that it was
perfectly right and legal to bride Democrats
to speak in taror Of Republican candidates.
| may be said that this testimony as to
Schaak is hearsay evidence The dec
laration Of voter as to his qualifica-
ton or disqualification to vote is al
ways received in evidence; he is
regarded as party to the proceedings.
rms IS well settled and uniform
Practice tsec - n. 7; Rep, People VS..
Pease; McCord's Rep, p. $50, foot
note; contested election case, Vallan-
digham and Campbell, Cong. Globe.
vol. Al, p. 2317; and in the case of Mil
borne Porte, ], Douglas Election Cases
81, IS. l29, 100, etc, (see 3, McCord, 23U),
1t was decided that the admissions of
n voter that he was bribed are always
receivable in evidence. They rest
also on the broader ground that con-
LESSONS Of crime receivable against
the party ARE the highest and most
satisfactory proof" Russell on
Grimes, vol. ,, p. s23). Here the adj.
missions arc confirmed by all the sur
rounding circums tanccs: the sudden
conversion on the eve of the election:
the new clothes, money, etc.
William Il. Mctcalf 90. 1927, a farmer
residing in Crystal Lake township
near Minneapolis; testitics that he
was paid Sl5 to work at the polls in
crystal Lake township for the Repub-
lcan ticket Corser, one of the par
Ties who hired him to work at the
polls. was Republican candidate for
state senator, and asked him to sun
port Washburn; he refused: subse-
luently he was engaged to work at the
polls for the Republicans. The Sl5
was paid to him by Charles w. john
son, secretary of Washburn's commit
tee, the same party who bribed Sha-
yren, Flaherty, etc. He went to John.
sons office two days after the election:
ne simply presented his name and
Johnson paid him the SIS without
word. He declines to say who he voted
for for Congress; will not swear that
ne did not vote for Washburn.
1t will be remembered that when
Major Hale attempted to bride Sha-
prem, he told Shagren to come the day
al L l..