The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-12-05
GAMBILL ISSUES CARD
 STATING HIS POSITION

Alderman A. A Gambill from the Third ward. who was elected Wednesday night, issued the following statement yester- day:
 To the People of Birmingham: MT. Asa L. Hoyt has made a statement in re- gard to the recent contest for alder man from the Third ward. I feel 1t my duty to reply to him.
 In the first place the City Council, whose duty it was to fill the vacancy in the office of alderman, having been intimately associated with me for years, and having been thoroughly acquainted with my work as a public official and the manner of the performance of it., and knowing that through more than ten years of public service l had discharged my duty fully and faithfully and in every particular and that no single suggestion had ever been made that I had ever misused a cent of the public money, or that l had ever failed in any particular in the discharge of my duty, promised me their support.
 In the meantime MT. Hoyt had cir culated a petition, which was signed by a large number of my friends who were not aware of the fact that I was a candidate, asking for his election. In view of the condition l agreed to re- lease the majority of the City Coun- ell from their promise to elect me upon condition that our mutual claims should be submitted to a democratic primary and this was assented to on every hand
 The city democratic executive commit tee called a democratic primary. The City Council asked for a democratic pri- mary and we agreed that there should be one. This primary was called for the same day with the general election, September 2. At the general election 39 men voted for w. T. Masterson, the republican nominee for mayor voted for the socialist candidate and more than 30 so-called democrats refused to vote for the democratic nominee for mayor, notwithstanding the fact that he had opposition which was active and in sistent.
 One of these men testified on the trial that he would have been glad if O'Brien had been defeated. The bal ance of them manifested the same spirit. The so-called majority of the city dem- ccratic executive committee counted the vote of c. C. Douglass for Asa L. Hoyt, although Douglass had gone into the democratic primary in the previous July, had thereby pledged his honor to sup port the nominee and although he broke his pledge and refused to support Mir. O'Brien and declared in the presence of the committee himself that he would have been delighted at OBrien's de- feat
 When the committee first announced it's ruling on the qualification of voters 1t declared that 1t would reject the votes of those who went into the general cleo ton and scratched part of the dem ocratic ticket and then with treason fresh upon their hands, went into the primary to make a nomination Afterward, in se- cret caucus, without notice or hearing, and without even a motion to reconsider, they adopted another resolution to count these votes which they had before sol emnly declared to be illegal.
 Upon the trial, although summons were repeatedly issued, only two of the 43 republicans and socialists could be in- duced to testify. The rest stayed away. I used every effort I could to get them but they refused to come. I had charged that they voted for Hoyt; the commit tee had ruled that 1t would reject all of these votes. Is not their failure to ap- pear conclusive evidence that they did vote for Hoyt or at least the over whelming majority of them? If they did. there were more than enough of these votes to have changed the result.
 But more than this, there were be- tween 20 and 25 of those who scratched the ticket in the general election, every one of whom testified that he voted for Hoyt. There were almost enough of these men who testified to have changed tho result without counting any of the republicans or socialists who refused to appear before the committee.
 More than this, there were 30 or 40 men who scratched the ticket who pur- posely stayed away and refused to tes- tify.
 Under these circumstances, can any fair minded man who is disposed to weigh the evidence or render a true Judgment doubt that received ma jority of the democratic votes of that ward? To say that I did not get the majority of the democratic votes of the ward in the face of the uncontradicted evidence in the case is an insult to the intelligence of any man acquainted with the facts.
 But more than this in the solemn opinion rendered by the city attorney, an able and impartial lawyer, 1t was held that the ballot box in the general election could be opened by the com mittee and the ballots compared with those in the primary and the result considered in evidence. The committee was acting as 8 judicial body under the auth hority of the statutes of this state. It had all the power of any court with respect to the admission and consideration of testimony. It had also all the immunities of any court and its judicial actions could not have been questioned anywhere by anybody, and yet a deliberate attempt was made to convince the committee, which, be 1t said was successful. that if they opened the box which contained the conclusive evidence that would determine the mat ter for all time, that they would be guilty of crime. In support of this assertion, which is in the teeth of every principle of law and of justice, they adduced no authority whatever, because there was none to adduce.
 Although the statute said the box could be opened in any contest they pretended to interpret it as meaning something entirely different. I repeat this box could have been opened by the committee or by its authority. It could not have been opened otherwise. If Asa l.. Hoyt and his attorneys had been willing to have the box opened the question at issue would have been de- termined conclusively without com plaint from any quarter.
 The committee could not have been guilty of a crime, not only because there would have been no law which they violated but also because 1t is a universal principle everywhere recog- nized that courts of justice cannot be tried or convicted because of their mis- takes when they act judicially There was ample authority in the law itself