Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1869-06-15
The CONTESTED ELECTION.
HEARING OF THE CAUSE OF WALLACE
VS.. WILLIAMS.
Third Days Proceedings Of the PrOsecu-
ton.

Instructions under whichhe acted, includ-
ed the Fifteenth Civil District, and were
in that particular different from those
produced in court, bu upon examination
of the copy in his possession he found ne
was mistaken; that il did not mention
the Fifteenth Civil District, but was pre-
cisely the same as the one shown MN IN
court.
In regard TO the objection raised by de-
PENDANTS counsel as to the right Of petit
toner to have access TO the
Of the late election, court held That the
poll books were the returns and if / n pos
session Of the Registrar the plaintiff had
the right 10 examine the same.
The poll-bOoks were then brought in
by defendant Williams and counsel pro-
ceeded to examine them to show that the
votes of persons living outside of the 9TH,
18th, I4th and 18th Civil Districts could
be designated from those cast by persons
living in the country. Pending the ex-
animation il W foundthat the tally-lists,
which usually accompany the returns in
all elections, were not forthcoming; these
were then demanded by plaintiffs coun-
4 sci for the reason that they were a part of
the returns of the election, and as such
should be produced; that they would ma
torialIy enable the court to ascertain what
number ofvotes were cast from the coun-
Try and what number from the city.
Defendants counsel stated that all the
documents concerning the election were
then in Court; that no tally lists were sent
in from the polls with the returns, and
therefore the defendant could not produce
them; that he was ready to do all in his
power, but could not reveal that which he
did not have. Counsel further held that
If the plaintiffs counsel were permitted to
enter into a~nSeXamiuation of the poll
books and ballot boxes that the cases
would then be turned into a case of con-
i 4Aag.l a11as.r, nv,I v.nH n rlVAanalTn~ nf
mandamus; that the evidence then before
the Court was irrelevant and incompetent,
and ought to be excluded from the case
entirely; that the plaintiff could only
look TO the returns proper for an explana-
ton.
Plaintiffs counsel insisted that the de-
fendant Williams had the tally lists in his
possession; that they were returned with
the poll books and ballot boxes; hat wit
nesses on the stand had testified to re-
turning the tally lists with the returns,
and therefore they must be in the possess
sion Of said defendant.
Defendants counsel moved that all the
documents brought into Cou in obedi-
nee to the subpoena served on defendant
Williams, except the proper returns, be
excluded from the case IS irrelevant to
the matter then pending. Nc action was
taken on the motion by the Court.
G.. r. Powell was here introduced TO de-
fine the boundary and various districts Of
the county.
p. d. BOYD was recalled To testify as re-
CARDS the returningof the tally list. Was
= clerk in Fourth ward, colored; we kept
d tally list orscrip, upOn which We counted
the votes; the return was not sent up
with the p~oL-books; it was not signed by
the Judges and Deputy Commissioner;
the returns were made up from such scrip
or memoranda; the returns in Court were
all that were signed and all that were sent
up.
George Mallory SpOT3I.-Was one of the
| clerks at Fifth ward, colOred; was present
when the ballots were counted; there was
a tally llst-a rough list-kept, on which
we used while counting the votes; this list
was not signed by the Judges nor was it
returned with the poll-books; don't think
/ ! could recognize the ballot-boXes.
CrOSS-erGHiaei.-The returns in Court
are all that were sent up from Eifth ward
10 the Commissioner
c.. VI. Greeley was here sworn and in
troduccd by defendants counsel. Know
that a certificate of election was issued
on Doth May, Saturday, certifying that
Hudson had received the largest number
| Of Votes; the certificate, with several
/ ~others-Smith, Lee and Horrigan-were
given TO witness; got them from VIII
liams; no n present when given me;
| they were issued on Saturday about ii or
y O'clock; kept them for perhaps an half
hour; did not give them 10 the several
candidates; gave themtO SOEaebOdy-eithcr
TO w. J. Smith or Dr. Aston: saw the re-
turns: they were complete; did not go
over the returns; heard Commissioner
say they were complete; don't know
where Hudsou's certificate is now;
the person 10 whom l gave It was
going to Nashville; never told uud-
son Of having his certificate; went
TO Mr.. kOrtrecht's office about one
o'clock; did not 20 to Mr.. Kortrech's Of
| flee about the certificates; did not tell
| him anything about them.
WhitcOmD here took the stand. | pre-
pared Q tabular statement from the cleo
ton returns; have " examined poll
| books; basis of the tabular statement was
! from the returns and not the poll books;
* Is a correct statement OF the election;
furnished Mr.. ROSsellc with an abstract
! Of return on Saturday evening; nothing
material was furnished afterwards (the
abstract appearing in the paper was COM
pared with tho tabular statement, and
some lOW errors were a apparently;
/ could not tell whether voters lived in h
country or city, from the returns from
which the table was made; saw no tally
list; saw some few strips OF paper upon
/ which the votes were counted at the diff
ferent polls, but they were not signed by
the Judges; the strips of paper did not
indicate whore the voters lived.
Cross EE0aIRcd-Paid no attention 10
the strips of paper; Williams desired me
to make out the returns; the tabule
was gottenup rs a matter of convenience:
made out on Saturday after election;
White Station was not on the tabule; the
returns which wCrenOt signed by all Of the
Judges were left out the returns from LIST,
I'd and 81 districts are not included; they
came ina but were moi signed by the Deputy
Commissioners, he having refused to do SO;
some were counted in which IA returns
were not fully signed; the footing was not
ali made on Saturday; know nothing of
the certificate being given 10 Hudson Of
my WI knowledge; heard that il was is
sued on Saturday shout 10 o'clock: last
returns came in about 10 o'clock; had
some conversation with Wallace as TO
the matter; might hav told Gen. Wallace
that Hudson came in and asked Mr.. Viii
liams for his certificate, and that VIII
liams said he would not give il to him un-
I'll the mandamus was decided; told Gen.
Wallace that he had accused Mr.. Williams
wr0ngfully; do not know that Hudson
really asked Williams for the certificate;
may have done 50; heard Williams say
that no certificates should be issued until
the writ OF mandamus Was settled.
Re-eruMalRed.-Saw Williams Sunday
morning; said he would obey the law
and not make returns 10 the Secretary OF
state; was much annoyed during the
Nnole OF SATURDAY previous; returns from
Third District We're rejected because w.
ii. Wall, Deputy Commissioner, would
not sign them, on acouut Of some Illegal
ity; Williams told me 10 omit them: Wall
said be would not sign them because all
the ballots were not counted; Gen. Wal
lace was not among the number of per
sons annoying us on Saturday after the
election.
Or. LrWin.-Was a clerk at the Ninth
Ward colored. l1his witness testimony
was merely cumulative.l
John LO0gHe recalled by M. RortgecAG.
What did you understand me to say in
the course of my statements to the plain
tif7s counsel durin the argument 70 quash
the writ OF mandamus?
Al was of the opinion that It was
feared by the plaintiffs counsel that if the
writ was quashed Williams would give
the certificate to Hudson before another
could be served upon him, and then I'M
derstood You to say positively that il was
not Williams intention to do anything
wrong, and that you had advised him TO
do nothing which would place Gen. Wal
lace in a worse position than he was at /
that time.
Odd it not sound more as a PROPOSE
fiou than rs n nrOmiao2