The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1854-05-20

The act means that shall all be concluded before the
inspectors separate Neither do think that it inn
practicable to make this return, has been alleged It
however, in evidence, that this occasion they did
adjourn and met next day; and then the
the return was made and slsd il appeared tina. they
discovered an error in It. They then called the
Supervisor Sunday, and asked him for his advice
He suggested amended return and they adopted his
suggestion. There then stands two returns-the first
ihowing that Mr.. McConkey had l96 votes, and the
second that he had l79. Under the arst Cumming G.
Tucker had IS votes while the second he received
~ The charge is that the inspectors on this occasion
wully neglected and corruPtiy ps.aSrpsd their duty
they culpabe, not only OF neglect, but OF wiful
neglect Proof has been adduced to show that this is
tai place Though this is authority for its legality
yet 1t tends to disarm the act Of wful negligence Men
in good n may &C. % ON saeh penay
not party to the counting &. for %.rd he h T1s
examination made by the two other inspectors So
far therefore, he was not personally concerned in
this goes in his favor Surprising that this
was completed it is competent Tor you judge whether
IL true Had the certificate been made the night
knowing what the result II is competent too for
the jury TO take into consideration the language of the
inspectors when the parties called upon them when they
said, I'VE have adjourned" II Is for the jury say
whether the canvass not completed. 1t APP
pears, further, by the testimony Willard, that he
WATCHED ten tns Whole &c He gives lucid
either side.
There one singular feature in all this Holmes was
the clerk OF the Board and the day after the election
about III AM he is found at Childs' Office applying to
them to print tickets with the Of &C Tucker'
them. He makes bargain with the printer and takes
the tickets away. The printer Identifies the ticket
nexed to the return of the tickets he
Holmes The fact is clear that Holmes got these tickets
the day after the election His statements then be
treated worthless and unworthy of belief and he may
be the head and front of all this difficulty Over eighty
witnesses have been produced support the
These men have various degrees of memory TO what
they and what they did. Many of them very
respectable and stand up unimpeached witnesses.
Nevertheless in coming to your decision, you have
right to take into consideration these different degrees of
memory opposition to them are witnesses for the de-
PENDANT, who the &C. Tucker ticket-some say they
it the morning Of the election. II is your province
to Judge of the fidelity and accuracy Of their memory
The first question then for you to determine IS whether
these defendants wilfully neglected their dutywully
that is against their better knowledge And you must
made up the nextday after the elections although my
Judgment this ID not doing what the law contempates.
The second son for your consideration is whether
this return false and corrupt as has been alleged
When the twenty five q Tucker votes' returned
that return true false You must look at this
carefully and examine the evidence all round Another
question for your consideration is whe Their, supposing
it to be false 1t corrupt and wilful wrong Could
these inspectors have made return falsely but without
any corruption? You have right to infer this but you
must have ample testimony to warrant such concu-
sion. That fraud committed by Holmes, is GER
tan but whether he alone guilty, it is hard to say
He is charged in the indictment having been
instigated by the inspectors but unless the proof
Of this is very satisfactory to your minds you cannot
como to such conclusion. If, however, you
WINGED from the evidence adduced before you that Holmes
connected with the inspectors in this matter, you
cannot do otherwise than find them guilty. The charac
ter too Of these must be taken into consideration
as in all of crcumstantial evidence Even in the
absence of proof to support character the presumption
is always in favor of the accused In this there has
been very powerful evidence to the good character Of
the Murray and should receive
strong consideration at your hands Character after
all, is that on which we mutually rely in this world
But character cannot be received against proofs II you
find that there has been wfu neglect corruption
the part of these inspectors in making their return then
good character cannot weigh iota. If, again you
have any reasonable we'll founded doubts, you must
give them in favor of the prisoners for the law allows it.
At half past ten O'Clock the jury rendered verdict of
ttNot guilty.n