The New York herald., 1869-06-15
SUPREME C1JaT-c.RCUlT.

How an Eieciian May be COnducted--A Curl.
GUS Charge oil Foraery-The Ninth District
Assistant Alderman Contest.
Before Justice Mullen.
The Peop,e er rel. James T.. McVedny Gs. Peter
Culcia.-The relatOr this case and the defendant
were contestants for the Ninth Assistant Aldermanic
district at the last election. BY the press returns
the day AFTER it appeared Mr. Mcveany was elected;
but on the official canvass Mr.. Culkin was declared
elected by vote Of 21S3 for Peter Cukin. and 1880
for James E. McVeany. comparison Of the Official
canvass figures anu the figures in the Bureau Of
Elections Of the Metropolitan Police Department,
showed marked discrepancy in the ngures
from the Eleventh and Fourteenth districts
OF the Ninth ward. The Aldermanic figures
IN the Eleventh district showed for Mr.. Culkin
179 for Mr. McVeanv los. The police figures were
teenth district the figures received by the Aldermen
were for Mr.. Cuklp 37o for Mr. Mcveany q. The
Veany III Making these changes the aggregate vote
would stand for Mr. Culkn 1901, for Mr.. Mcveany
2,i52, giving Mr.. Mcveany majority OF l4l;
Mr.. Culkng took his seat under the decision of the
Board OF Aldermen and Mr.. McVeany brought his
suit.
The case came on to trial yesterday and the defen-
dant objected to the jurisdiction of the Court clam
Ing that the decision OF tie Board OF Aldermen was
e and TUGK as pSn. me InGr mae con
ceed. The plaintiff then placed on the stand the
Deputy Clerk Of the Bureau OF Elections. to prove
agreed with the figures claimed by Mr.. Mcveany
Mr.. William II. Kinsley, the poll clerk OF the Four
teenth district testified that the police certificate
was the correct one; that the one returned to the
Board OF Aldermen had been erased in several places
80 a. to change the two in 20 into three and the
IRON MIR. McVeany's III had been erased. He did
not, however, actually count the votes, though he
watched the count very closely, and was very sure
that his unatered return was correct. Mr.. Lake. the
canvasser, did make the account and was sure the
unatered return was correct. Mr.. Ackerman, an in
spector OF that district and Mr.. Anderson and Mr..
Mr.. COppens, who were present at the counting saw
1l9 votes counted for Mr.. Mcveany before they
some little careessness in allowing the presence OF
strangers Mr.. Foley ordered out all strangers be-
fore the canvass was concluded. These three last
as to see the face of the ballots This last
witness saw one OF the inspectors take out
Of the tickets and drop
were some fifty tickets so taken He said nothing
about it then. There were Culkin and Edward
terested enough in it to risk black eye. He told
It soon a. he went out to Anderson and Ander
son told McVeany at Headquarters and called on
nm lCOppens) to corrOborate him.
From tine Eleventh district, Mr. Johnson, the eau
vasser, testified the true return TO be $50 for
Mcveany and 107 for Mr.. Culkin Mr.. James G. Will
vote announced by Mr. Dunham, one Of the poll
clerks. There were two officers ana the can
vassers and poll clerks behind the railing and seve
raj outside and some confusion outside OF the rail-
ing. Mr. Ogden one of the policemen present, con-
1rmed the last witness.
The returns made to the official Board of Can
TO the light, and were in part so clumsy done as to
leave the original quite dscernible.
The cr0ss-examlnatOn OF the witnesses did not
materially anect their testimony.
The plaintlns testimony was closed, when the
Judge announced that he should wish counsel to
submit briefs on the question OF jurisdiction on
Cierko and render a decision on Wednesday morn
lng.