The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-10-30

~voff11
q Error i'm Sth division of 9th ward. Ii
= Error in 9th division of 18th ward .....,.... IL
= Error in Tth division Of 18th ward .......... II
y Error i'm an division OF 25th ward ........... 20
Il Error in 10th division OF goth ward.
Total. .............,..
Petitioner's majority, y,....................,..4 a
THO rctitioncr, Mr.. Sheppard, prays to be heard
IN exhibit and explain these errors in order that the
sS,nrt will reeNamne and reconsider their count
and Judgment and TO declare the true vote.
MT Biddle opening the matter on behalf OF the
70 cau I'm question the principles upon which the
conrt has already decided, but simply to direct their
sitpntion to certain cercal and arithmetca errors
im tba compqtation made in that Judgment
" nudge Allison suggested that since certorar
boI been allowed in this case, the first question
,vonld properly be whether the Court had power to
nroceed with this petition
NJ Riddle said that this was the same term in
,yhirb The Judgment was given, and therefore the
court had power to review that decision.
Mr Mann, appearing ior Mr. Gibbons, here moved
IN dsmys the writ first, because the record OF this
eec was not in court and therefore the Court were
pCwerless to re-eXanine or alter 1t; and secondly,
attention TO simple clerical aud arithmetical mis-
fakes, but that its vitality consisted alone in recall
inG matters which were of the merits of the CON
tpsts and which have already been passed upon.
Mr.. Bidde denied that this was the plrpose OF the
unon three clerical and arithmetica errors and
omissions. FIRST there was an error in the thirty
six naturalized votes, which the Court decided the
rpspOndents the contest were entitled to- and were
rounted in the of the Mayor, but omitted in the
case of the District Attorney. The next was an
been counted, because in the taking OF the testi-
mony counsel had agreed that those unassessed
voters who said that they had voted the Republican
or democratic ticket should be taken to have voted
for ali the candidates upon that ticket These ia
votes cast for the Democratic ticket came under tnat
class and while the Court did not throw ont nm
assessed voters of this class in other instances vet
these IA were thrown out
Mr. Mann deniei that any such agreement was
entered into
Jndre Allison said the Judgment of the Court con-
sdered this matter and decided that no such aoree
ment between counsel should take the place OF the
proof of the qualifications Of votes.
MFR Riddle said that this certainly was the undcr
standing under which counsel acted during tha
whole Examination.
Mr. Gerhardt and Mr. Sellers gave their evidence
.. tbo same assertion SAVING thst had II not hnan
that the case would have occupied twice as mnc5
ti@e tnns tuS aS 9, b9d consumed ''0o 90 iAu0ii
Mr. Mann AGAIN denied this and made an oxnl.
nation.
Judge Allison said the agreement between counsel
was immaterial, for the majority of the Court had
decided that they were to Judge of the competency
of the proof OF votes.
Judge Ludlow said that he had made the failure
TO compute according to this supposed agreement a
point OF his dissent
Mr.. Biddle resumed, saying that he hoped to show
the Court that he was correct in his position, and
maintained that he had already overcome II and 36
votes, making so, and with an error of admitted
by the other SIDE there were left IS votes to
come
As to the obJectlon thaI Ihe VIII Vi certoIarl was
bar to this proceeding he thought that as the term
in which the judgment was gwen had not yet eX-
PRED, the whole matter was ye III te breasts or the
Judges and the lact tat one OF the Judges VINO de-
@ ~ .o 10 tins ,,r a.; t ,,rosont W otlS nc
WIN Ul H t ~ nc PresJC h ne
InUoeS "0s oatb ys odnSn,Serad in fb 40 NC
sur, ule VTi . maa va r tf @ III UG SoIlon
IisSS osU h oe sr use Va so @ IN ieaS were
! !ugGs % t@ is nd t ,n IN miioia u'9 pro-
t USeetg pUpu p y i r, ab ub '5 "oui" Juloloy hhW
WIZ I1 ol"is1PVo iiinon anS 1ii ca IT. ,bo, ,
,nmsshia nnd tyaS orIa6 bet + a., was va inaue T
a nn%f yas The SaT IL ha I'm, hoo % vi 90 th
as neHS mas Se oaS' II having oeeh lssueu OH Che
18Th 9 VI OSIUDei; Snier ,,i, .,, 1,,,- ., 49,. -, -
4 ou9so S a," oiT 0nseS Wy re noI yeS pre-
PIeu W an opilioh upon regal elect OF
tlle eietC was w am ii5 MnolS C"Sc OuI Oh CoucG
1s AZ ps9nua ., ms lluioH uHereu
in sav $ y6o+ e to % % eeTT ""u oe''er Proceeu
" say midt MdS W NC sdPl'
MI Bdu!c then resHmed-Ihe Sc naturalzed
NOeS, "a ~ pulSls Ie flSllh uNIslon OF Ine Nln5h
MdIordnu III recount were duultCeu ny the 0Cher
sue; ; anu tlaG lhaae 90 S"teS ior wnlCH Mr. Shep-
pau was W oe creulteu ny tue aumlssion Oh Jne
USnei se. III Iie oplWioI W Va tic Court 1t was sald
tldI IL was Ile uuIy oI Tue court 10 save poll where
IL could DE dOhe by purgatl"h'
But in the Sixth division OF the Seventeenth ward,
he unassessed vote amounted to 81, but instead of
hrOwing out the whole vote he threw out only A.
SO in the Seventh division OF the Seventeenth ward
instead of throwing out the 50 unassessed votes ony
% were thrown out. This did not look like acting
upon what Mr. Mann stated to be the principle to
throw out the whoe1nassessed vote but was rather
like acting upon what was understood to be the
agreement of counsel at the examination
With the 5b votes admit tod nd tho 10 lf, +o o o,o,
come the facts Tins nHbSjted n,nSt tbroI, ~ ~ JiSn
majority in favor of Mr. SbenmrG r low b uGCnue %
error in oitbar oS tb , ~ tnr .no
70 ~ vtioneu IN elIheI vi tle purgatlons amounted
ment hnt f sSnn,e m I nresnt3io 1 % ~ aIer t iU aSu
ouU @ ioi p sIpi p,oeoi'va'ion ,0 " Ihe Court,
Mr. Mann replied that, admitting the ifty-dvC
votes, thirteen were left as Mr. Gibbons orty anC
the petitioner to these asked the Court to retract
their steps and restore the votes that they hat
already decided should be thrown out, ana thea Mr.
Sheppard would be elected by A majority. II wa
confessed that the decree was correct, If Judge
Brewster did not compute the unassessed vote
made misaSa s in hps ure and Mr. s6ennar wa