The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1868-11-18
LOCAL DEPARTMENT.

o. -
The FIFTH WAND ELxorIos oAsE.-Aii
the justices sat In bdnc on the contested elec-5
tion case, when the following testimony was
d, Klpheus Tucker: witness was commits
,hfs o. t5e Second precinct q the Eth
q. Who resolved the votesi A. lid.
q. Did you mark the tickets voted by sold
marked 49, and the same mark placed oppo-
site the soldier voting the ticket.
The box o, Tie w"tS was then oGsneS and
cratic tickets marked "S.n
Benjamin N. Meade: Witness was commits.
nineteen OF twenty soldiers voted at that wardi
. squad Of sixteen or eighteen soldiers came I
up In. uniform, under the command Of a non
Radical ticket, Mi: Parry took their votes and
placed a letter 50 on each OF their ballots.
n boz box SnS issSs sS
The Chief Justice. Why no. leave that to
have already proved they voted the Demo |
cratic ticket what more do you WANT |
MT. Cook said IN the next precinct he would |
il would be a. well 70 separate the b.liots' |
The witnes. selected from the box 20 I'eno- !
Davis Baker. Was commissioner Of the Fifth !,
precinct of the Fifth ward. Some u or 10 sol |
diers voted there. They mostly all voted the !
hnti.hhutchi tickcis Aho oh"c UP III
Sergeant Major Gore. witness had seen sol.
oilers 60 from L .S es,rask: ITO to vote; a..
@. How do you know thMi A. They told
Mr.. Davidge. 1 object. Tho evidence of
what the soldiers saidls inadmissible clearly.
Mr.. Cook: have authority on the subject.
MT payldge. would like to Know the name
Mr., Cook. It y a very large collection Of
%sontestea election sssss;1, He qISSteaa ing
Seal case, and other legislative authority to
show that the declaration OF voters as to their
votes vas admissible in contested election
Judge Cartier. The Court arc, Of the better
opinion that this evidence 10 not admissible.
The authorities cited are conclusive, but OF
different forum. The bodies in which these
deeilons were made were "a law to them
Court must be governed by a different rule.
Hat the declarations been made at the time OF
the voting, so as to have formed q part Of the
but II was not so in this case, and the evidence
could not be received.
Judge Fisher begged leave to differ with his
brethren of the majority. None OF these SOL
oilers could be called here and made to crimi.
nate themselves by declaring how they voted.
more especially as Congress had given the
Court summary authority over the subject.
Mr.. Cook next offered incvidence the record
ofthe naturalization Of 43+ persons between
the eoih Of December, 1867, and the day Of
election.
dence, an act Of C0ngreIs OF Nay Is, 1909,
which, after reeiting that native Americans
coming OF age between the 3Oth OF December
and the day OF election are not allowed to vote
at that election, enacted that foreigners natu-
right to vote at the election nrst succeeding
that I3I foreigners had been nAturalized be-
tween the goth Of December, 1851, and the
hR Fifth nd n MaalR
Mr. D.vIdge. DO you hold that law to be
applicable to the board Of registration1
Mr.. Cook. Just now do. ILaughter
Mr.. Davidgc explained that under the old
charter no one could vote who had not, before
the 3oth OF December OF the year preceding the
eoSing 81 age between that period and tie
election had not been assessed with a school
Ss Nv ns Sy esy i0%s e.
place foreigners and minors on the same foot.
Ing in this respect. But the new law OF 1861
had repealed the law which Mr.. Cook quoted.
Mr.. Riddle. 1t was the law Of Democratic
MI. Merrick. 1t was Know N othing law.
Jndse Cartier thought 4 plain that the act
OF May l, 1856, was repealed.
Sois se LtSssSo ssa Sad
specific provision for an Especial case, such
provisions were not repealed by subsequent
siIabis repugnance between the latter and the
former acts, and that the repeal OF laws by I'M
plieation was to receive no countenanee from
MT. Cook argued that the enforcement Of
Of Europe from controliihe this Government
y.,r suSiss,s' Who preieTred The soveTnmeot
80 crown and aeeptre AZ was now Inc case
o. o. Tho nrincinni citiea ar the eountrv The
law W hich REQUIRED three months residence in
wsrJ or one wear in the clty meant when
.onnriv cnnstrusS tbrse mnntba or n Year an
cltiIen' and therefore, foreigners were not
e,titisS n vote hin iii res dence al that period
are, nstnrsii,a alton
III. Eourt tooI a recc.s unon reasAem-
bIings
nsiv. o.rtter a,id. Tho Court were of
onintnn IN Al The n iestion IL moi nroner They
Irvs done 40 under the iIeht OF the statute Of
iseJ This statute had for lis object tho ex-
tension az fhe Franchise and IL Proceeds to
uamniish al the imneIimenta OF franchise
uuhIch haL hcretofara existeS THAT WAS ali
VIZ ""N
Vi Inds. MI, ..Lsd ~ .nv or tho counscI c,uld
,5nhs az Wo"stI my W INV
M RidJie ali IN AZ the cou,.el ycre having
an axaminntion made Al Tho Wal DenaItment
snt eisswhcre with n viey In firihrr ev idence
oftha ea,de mao of these solIera These I'VE re
OF me nmnist. ~ nI sheu ,vnd have to AL
not "A, IL ,hl evidancs nmt Of ia re "ni,r order
n,Ssswiss ths cssn Of tho rca'mnhent was
Jn.ed '"' S"'' " Wv
,,'a Co,r, s,,y mn ohia.,Io, ., sllo,vinr the
.itnoa % .amo In berssftar I'hcre was no
H p'In ,h No V caac a,h INC m .t,., wa within
jhu,y ~ ,, al 80" 81 ,,na remrt ' "'
w" NJ Snon s.It he ,ynum all o,e other wit
~. o''" '"'' "' "'N" 49, VIZ
Ty,a.u sworn. was clark nj tina Fifth
oi ,he ~ I'm ~ al ner.nns votio@
lie put uoWh the hhme VI NJ Pvrsohs Nounsl