The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-10-18

can impeach or question its judgments, and they
establish the right of each Of these witnesses to
his vote If otherwise qualified at the election
which is now the subject of our inquiry.
Other witnesses prove that a number of natu-
ralizatOn papers were reiected-frOm ttve 20 ten
or perhaps more at each Of these divisions at
tackled, ana amounting in all to about 3OO cases
no one OF the 800 was produced, nor have the re-
ieCted papers been exhibited to us. The proof here
IS simply from citizens who were at the polls ana
saw persons produce naturalization paper pur-
porting to have been issued by the supreme
Court, and saw their votes rejected. IL the right
OF these 300 persons to vote were established, and
if it were in proof that they would have voted for
the incumbents, then 1t would become our plain
duty to credit them, along with the thirty-six we
have spoken Of TO the respondents We could not
reject the entire polls, amounting TO many thOus
sands of votes, because number suscepti@Die @ 60, Oh
us by witnesses, had been rejected. 1t would IN
such case be possible to correct the evil ana as
already explained, our duty Is TO work out every
But we cannot even credit the three hundred to
either side for the following reaSOns:-
1st II nowhere appears that the rejected certif
Gates were genuine. They are not produced, ana
their authenticty-whiCh could, perhaps, be alone
established by inspection-is not referred to by
any witness as within his knowledge.
I'd. The mere holding OF genuine paper would
not establish the right to vote Ihere must also
have been an assessment payment OF tax and re-
sidence in the division, AS to all OF these points,
Sd. The greatest difficulty in the way of credting
these three hundred to any account IS that there
tlcular candidate, or for whom?
Canwe conjecture that these papers were genu-
inc that the holders thereof had al the other qua
lincatons Of voters and that beyond all this they
would have voted for the incumbents?
No Court was ever asked to decide q question
upOn such multiplication OF gueSSeS.
The next point presented by the respondents is,
that 50 votes were received and counted for con
testants from persons holding fraudulent natural
ntnion papers, or otherwise disqualified.
The proofs establish this allegation and the in
cumbentS should receive the credit claimed. Most,
if not all these voters should be prosecuted and
severely punished.
1t is often said in the argument of these cases
that the only remedy for fraud is to punish the
palalyzc the arm Of the law in these inyestiga-
lions it should be rejected So far rs it asserts 4
sound truth, il should be accepted. Unfortunately,
however, with the exception of very rare and COM
mendablc prosecutions, fraudulent voters have
gone unpunished. Success brings with its salts
faction, lenency for friends and magnanmty for
foes, and thus great wrongs amounting to treason
the only treason it seems Of our age-go un-
punished. That 10 blame may attach herein to
The Court, we commend these 81 and all the other
fraudulent voters named on our record, and every
officer who violated his oath, to the prompt atten-
ton Of the proper authority.
Lastly-Ihe respondents claim credit for the
thrty-six naturaliZed citizens who would have
to do For the reasons already stated, this de.
mand should be allowed. Before the act OF April
H., 1862 election officer could go behind genu-
inc seal and signature, and he incurred the liza.
bility Of severe penalty by arogating TO himself
My brother Judge Ludlow, dissents from the
views above stated, ana will express his opinion
My brethren President Judge Allison ana Judge
PeTCe. do not agree to the impOSSbitty test. They
think that the evidence may show general ne
glect OF duty ON the part Of the officers of the elec
ton violence at the polls fraudulent voting, &c,
which, in tie language of the law, renders the
election undue and yet it may be possible to purge
the poll This they do not think they are required
to do in all cases but to ascertain if the election
| was due electon-that is legal and proper
eleCtiOn-Or whether the return is true or false
| return. ..
The views above stated lead to the following
| results:-
FOR MAYOR.
Mr. FoX's majority, rs returned. was. ..... 1888
| TO which is to be added the number of natural
lied persons who swear they would have voted
rejected Observation-Disclosures. 81