The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-08-17
NEW YORK, SATURDAY MORNING. AUGUST II, 1914.
More about the /" Elliot Ccrtiflcates"-Mr.
Bankers Reply to MisrepresentatiOns.


More about the Elliot CertiAcates"-Mr.
Bankers Reply to misrepresentation.
On Saturday last for the first time was favored
with the perusal of pamphlet which has been put
into circulation by the authority Of the Wing meet
ing which was convened at the st Louis Exchange
on the 3d July, 1S4f-professing to describe the
conduct OF the Inspectors OF the late election, and
the proceedings OF the Legislature in relation to
the Elliott certificates, in which pamphlet am
sorry to be compelled to say there ere some errors,
What happened at any other Poll than that of the
First Ward Second Municipality, have not any
knowledge, but as TO what happened at that Poll
am not mistaken. The authors Of the said PAM
phlet are mistaken in saying that James p Freret,
Esq. my associate inspector, adopted separate box
and received the woes after the difficulty arose
about the Elliott votes, without being recognized
by me, until the close Of the Polls; the second box
was adopted by both and not ballot placed in it
which was not recognized by meas well as by
MIR. Frere, at the time, and before It was put into
that box. Only one ballot, Chat of Mr. Kelly was
placed in either box without my consent, and that
was put into the original box by Mr.. Frere, before
the second box was introduced ;-this led TO the
compromise, after which the business OF the cleo
ton was conducted with all possible despatch and
harmony, and not voter remained at the polls Of
ferng to vote when the hour arrived for closing;
and 1t Is not known that single voter lost his vote
by the short delay which took place. Hence, the
declaration that the Wing majority was probably
reduced forty or fifty by this delay, is an imaginary
figure as improbable, as their statement as to the
conduct OF the two Inspectors, Is erroneous To
have effected this majority OF forty or fifty, there
must have been more than one hundred and fifty
good votes rejected, as the Wings did not get two
thirds of the votes polled.
The statement here make, the reader will find
corroborated by The process perba bearing the sigma
lures of both Inspectors file in the Office Of
the State Departments copy OF which will be
found on page 81 of this book.
1t will be seen by perusal OF the pr oces verbal
(page 81 to 47lOt this pamphlet that MIR. Freret Is
mistaken when he says that Mr.. Barker had given
his opinion In writing that the Elliott vote was
good ;-all that Mr. Barker urged was investigation,
which was refused, and to consider them good II
in due form, and not mpeached.
After having thus described me ss one OF the Of
Tending Judges, the Committee go on to say;
"The undersigned would only further observe,
against the offending Judges who have been BIO und
to appear before the Criminal Court, and true
bills OF Indictment have been found against them "
This SO tar as relates to me, Is all fiction, nor is
it true that bills OF Indictment against those judges
against whom proceedings are pending, have been
found
The committee have published in their pamphlet
the penalty of the law Tor DISTINGUISHING citizen,
but omitted to proclaim the penalty OF the law tor
interfering with the Inspectors in the discharge OF
their duty. 1t is to be found in the Act of Novem-
Der Z, 1914, LIST Mo: Digest page All, sec. 5, and
is in the following words,-
"If 1t may be made to appear to the satisfaction
Of the proper court that at any election held or to
be holden, under the laws of this State, any intim
idation, threats or violence, shall have been used
or practised, with design to influence unduly, or to
Overawe such election, or to restrain the freedom
of choice; or IT any officer OF election shall be
threatened, or violence used to his person, or be
interrupted in the execution of his duty, every per-
son who shall be guilty of such intimidation,
thereof, shall be hned in sum not exceeding one
thousand dollars, and be imprisoned, not exceeding
three months"
The statement in the said pamphlet is obnoxious
another ObieCtiOn-ln page & thew saw,
i" The report of the House OF Representatives,
respecting them, (the Elliott certfcates) discloses
a scene of gross neglect, fraud and corruption
throughout the whole process under which they
were issued, unparalleled IN the history OF this
country"
)" They then 60 on to say
And the Senate in their proceedings, sitting as
High Court Of Impeachment under the solemnity
of oath, after laborlous examination OF testi-
mony; and hearing eloquent and able counsel on
the part of Judge Elliott, adopted the following ar
ticles ,3f Impeachment presented by the lower
house."
In these articles OF Impeachment which they set
forth at length in their pamphlet, it is among other
things stated, that 1748 certificates were unlaw-
fully and corruptly caused and permitted to be IS
sued between the I'd March, lS4l, and the LIST jan
uary, 1874. and which it is stated in the pamphlet,
that the Senate sitting as High Court OF lmpeach-
ment, adopted In place Of which, the Court quail.
fled their OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES the said
Benjamin O. Elliott was guilty Of the issuing OF
some of the said certificates as charged, but not OF
ALL
Ten members voting in the affirmative, and four
in the negative, "because they believed that the
question could not be divided" See page 30 OF
the Official journal of this trial.
And the Court further resolved,
"That the Senate in giving their votes upon the
articles Of Impeachment in this case, are not to be
considered as expressing, and do not intend TO ex-
press an opinion as 10 the right OF the parties pos
sessing certificates OF naturalization issued from
Judge Elliott's Court, to enjoy and exercise The
fra nchiae of American CItiZenao
This resolution is withheld from the pamphlet in
question.
Here we have evidence that Mr.. Freret was mis-
taken when he said (see page BAL that the Legis-
lature had impeached the Elliott certificates
1t will not escape notice that the charges against
Judge Elliott are limited to period subsequent to
the I'd of March, lS4l and yet all the certificates
issued by him for some six or eight years, during
the whole course Of his judgeship, are to be cons-
dered nullity, the authority Of these proceed
ngs, and without regard to the rights OF parties
holding them!
number disfranchised by this act Of injustice his
certificate, (see page 4D was in due FORM and as
good as any certificate OF naturalization granted by
any court in the United States, yet he disfran.
chised by the arbitrary conduct Of the Wing In
spectors.
Again, this Committee say, that
"Previous to the election it was publicly stated,
and indeed proclaimed, that the locofoco party
were determined, notwithstanding the notorious
and acknowledged frauds in issuing the Elliott
certificates, that these votes should be received or
they would close the voting in the Wing Wards. !"
So far as ! was concerned they are mistaken, as
is proved by my proposition to Mr.. Freret the day
before the electon-to examine into the validity
Of all the Elliott certificates which should be pre-
scented, rejecting such should appear to have been
improperly granted Also, by my report to pub
lie meeting held the same evening, Of Mr.. Freret's
refusal to agree to this propositions and his deter
innaton to reject all the Elliott certificates with
out enquiry with notification to the meeting that
should not have the capacity TO resist any such an
the questions which might arise to the Wing Judge
from whom we derived our appointment; and
finally, my letter written to that Judge on the
morning OF the election, and before it began init
place.
Can there be stronger evidence that | was not
obnoxious to the charge this Committee have