Henry Miller, and William Huntington, who had been appointed by the Board of Commissioners to act as judges of the election, were duly sworn to serve in that capacity. The clerks of the election were James Sloan and Evan M. Greene.42 According to the testimony of witnesses, the election was held in a legal and orderly manner.43 No special incidents or violence of any sort occurred. When the polls were closed and the ballots counted, it was found that the Mormons had cast almost a unanimous vote for Daniel F. Miller and the other candidates on the Whig ticket. Out of a total of 523 votes cast in the Kanesville precinct, Miller received 493 and Thompson 30. The other Whig candidates for State and local offices received almost the same majorities.** The news of this overwhelming triumph of Daniel F. Miller over William Thompson in the Kanesville precinct was received with astonishment and chagrin by the Democratic leaders. In the first place, the Democrats had apparently been hopeful of polling a substantial vote among the Mormons. In the second place, it very soon became evident that upon the Kanesville vote hung the issue as to whether Thompson or Miller was to represent the First Congressional District in the Thirty-first Congress. Interest, therefore, now centered at the county seat of Monroe County to which place the Kanesville returns were brought for final record. THE REJECTION OF THE KANESVILLE POLL BOOK It will be remembered that the Board of Commissioners of Monroe County had organized Kanesville into an election 42 See House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, pp. 7, 8. 43 Testimony of Evan M. Greene, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 37. 44 Official returns as printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 5. VOL. XII-4 precinct in the belief that the Kanesville district was included in the unorganized territory attached to Monroe County for election and other purposes. It therefore became necessary to file the Kanesville poll book with the Clerk of Monroe County, whose duty it was to include the Kanesville returns in the abstract of votes to be forwarded to the Secretary of State. Accordingly, James Sloan set out immediately with the poll book in question for Albia, where he arrived on Sunday evening, August 13th.45 In the meantime it appears that leading Democrats were determined that the Kanesville returns should not be received in case they should be found favorable to the Whigs. The leading figure in this preconcerted plan was J. C. Hall, the law-partner of William Thompson and later one of his attorneys in the contested election. According to his own confession, on the Wednesday preceding the election Hall went to Montrose in Lee County, where he had a conference with Augustus Caesar Dodge and L. W. Babbitt. The subject of the conversation was the Mormon vote. At the close of the conference Hall came to the conclusion that "no injury could arise from the vote of Garden Grove, in Appanoose county, or Pisgah, in Monroe county"; but he seemed to think otherwise with reference to the Kanesville vote, for it was his judgment that inasmuch as "Kanesville was north of Monroe county", the vote of that precinct "could not be legally received". Hall then told Dodge that he would, as "the friend of Mr. Thompson", attend to that matter.46 Hall and Dodge left Montrose together on the same day for Madison. While at that place Hall again discussed the question of the Mormon vote in the presence of A. C. Dodge, 45 Testimony of J. C. Hall, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 24. 46 Testimony of J. C. Hall, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 25. Ed Johnson, J. C. Walker, and ex-Governor James Clarke. After presenting his own views, Hall suggested that he would go to Albia and see to it that the Kanesville vote should not be counted if they thought it advisable. They all urged that he should go, "expressing the unequivocal opinion that the vote would be illegal and fraudulent, and that it ought, if possible, to be suppressed from the canvass." It seemed to be the impression that the Kanesville vote would be given to the Whigs.47 Hall then returned to Burlington, where he remained until after the election. It is not known what conferences he may have had at that place in this interval. On Thursday following the election Hall left Burlington for Albia, with the intention of being present when the returns of the election were opened and of preventing the Kanesville vote from being counted, on the ground that this vote was illegal and therefore void. 48 In the meantime James Sloan was on his way to Albia with the Kanesville poll book. On the morning of August 14th the office of the Clerk of Monroe County was the meeting-place of an anxious group of politicians representing both parties, for this was the day on which the returns were to be made, and the Whigs were alarmed lest the Kanesville vote should be rejected; while the Democrats feared that the vote would be received. About thirty persons were present, among whom were William Pickett (who had accompanied Sloan to Albia) and J. C. Hall. Considerable discussion at once took place as to whether the Clerk (Dudley C. Barber) should receive the Kanesville returns. Hall advised Barber not to receive them, giving as his reason that the organization of the Kanesville precinct by the Board of Commissioners of Mon 47 Testimony of J. C. Hall, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, pp. 25, 26. 48 Testimony of J. C. Hall, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 24. roe County was illegal, inasmuch as Kanesville was not directly west of Monroe County and, therefore, was not in the country attached to that county. Mr. Howell argued in favor of their acceptance.19 After a short time Sloan produced a sealed package which he offered to Barber as the official returns of the Kanesville precinct. Barber declined to receive the package, stating that he was satisfied that the Kanesville precinct was not in Monroe County, and that it was therefore not his duty to receive the vote of that district. Sloan thereupon laid the returns upon the Clerk's table. A heated discussion ensued. Finally, someone inquired what should be done with the returns in question. Hall replied: "Sweep them out of doors - they are waste paper." Pickett insisted that Barber had in fact received the papers, but the latter replied: "I have not, and I am not going to receive them". And he remained firm in his refusal. Soon afterwards Hall and Pickett and the others left the Clerk's office. The Kanesville poll book was left lying on the table,50 In the afternoon Sloan went back to the Clerk's office to induce Barber to endorse the poll-book. Sloan explained to him that he was going to start home the next morning and that he was desirous of securing his pay. Barber went to the table and took the poll book out from under some newspapers where he had placed it, but put it back in the same place without making any reply, whereupon Sloan left the office.51 49 Testimony of J. C. Hall, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 24. See also the testimony of James Sloan, p. 68. 50 Testimony of J. C. Hall, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, pp. 24, 25. See also the testimony of James Sloan, p. 68. 51 Testimony of James Sloan, printed in House Miscellaneous Documents, 1st Session, 31st Congress, Document No. 47, p. 68. A few days later the editor of the Iowa State Gazette (Burlington) published an editorial in which he presented in full the following reasons offered by Barber for rejecting the Kanesville vote: 1. The country called Pottawattamie county, in which Kanesville is situated, had been conditionally organized by an act of the Legislature, and the power of final organization given to the Judge of the 4th Judicial district. 2. That when Kishkekosh (now Monroe) county was organized, Pottawattamie county was Indian country, and consequently not attached by the organizing act- and that the subsequent acquisition of that country did not enlarge the boundaries of Monroe county. 3. That the action of the Legislature in conditionally organizing the Pottawattamie country into a county, as soon as the Indian title was extinguished, showed that it was not regarded as being attached to Monroe. 4. That, even admitting the country lying immediately west of Monroe county be attached to Monroe for election purposes, clear through to Missouri river, there was no evidence in existence in the absence of Government surveys, to show that Kanesville was west of said county; but, on the contrary, the maps showed it to be north of Monroe and west of Marion. 5. That the Commissioners of Monroe county had no authority to organize an election precinct out of Monroe and the legally attached counties; and that if they did so, it was the duty of the clerk to treat it as a void act. 6. That it was his duty to know the legal geographical boundaries of his county, and that he could not receive returns coming from any other place than Monroe county, or the legally attached country.52 THE RESULTS OF THE CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION The returns from the various counties in the First Congressional District came in slowly. Modern facilities for rapid communication and transportation had not yet made 52 Quoted in the Iowa Democratic Enquirer (Bloomington), Vol. I, No. 8, August 26, 1848. |